MEDEAMAA COMPANY LTD - vs. NATIONAL COMMUNICATIONS AUTHORITY, ACCRA [2018]DLECT4611

Date	2018-07-24
Suit No.	APPEAL NO: ECT/APP/002/2018
Citation No.	[2018]DLECT4611

JUSTICE DATE-BAH (PRESIDING)

PROFESSOR QUAYNOR

MR AKPADZI

ROBERT SUMAA FOR THE APPELLANTS

GOLDA DENYO FOR THE RESPONDENT

[2018]DLECT4611
																																						<div class="restriction-wrapper">
														<div class="container-lg">
															<div class="row">
																<div class="col-md-12 restricted-content">
																	<div class="restricted-content-img-wrapper">
																		<div class="lock-icon bounce-7">
																			<img class=""
																				src="https://dennislawgh.com/dl-assets/dl-images/lock-content.png"
																				alt="Subscription based content">
																		</div>
																	</div>
																	 
																		<a href="https://dennislawgh.com/login"
																		class="btn btn-primary btn-lg"
																		style="font-family: 'open sans'; text-transform: capitalize; border-radius: 8px"> 
																		Login to Read Full Case </a>
																	 
																	
																</div>
															</div>
														</div>
													</div>
													<main id="main" class="content" style="min-height: 60rem" >MEDEAMAA COMPANY LTD<o:p></o:p>(APPELLANT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>NATIONAL COMMUNICATIONS AUTHORITY, ACCRA<o:p></o:p>(RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p>(ELECTRONIC
COMMUNICATIONS TRIBUNAL)<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

APPEAL
NO: ECT/APP/002/2018&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; DATE: 24TH JULY 2018<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:
<o:p></o:p>ROBERT SUMAA FOR THE APPELLANTS <o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

GOLDA DENYO FOR THE
RESPONDENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:
<o:p></o:p>JUSTICE DATE-BAH (PRESIDING), PROFESSOR QUAYNOR, MR
AKPADZI <o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border-top:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
border-left:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;border-right:none;
padding:1.0pt 0in 1.0pt 0in">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center;border:none;
mso-border-top-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:1.0pt 0in 1.0pt 0in">DECISION<o:p></o:p>

</div>PROF.
DATE-BAH JSC (RETIRED): <o:p></o:p>This is the unanimous
decision of this Tribunal. The facts of this case are that the Appellant filed
a Notice of Appeal, pursuant to Section 88 of the Electronic Communications
Act, 2008 (Act 775) and Regulation 1 of the Electronic Communications (Rules of
Procedure of the Electronic Communications Tribunal) Regulations, 2016 (LI
2235), on 16th January 2018 against a decision of the Respondent dated 21st
December 2017 which imposed a fine of four hundred and five thousand (405,000)
Ghana Cedis on the Appellant. <o:p></o:p>The Grounds of Appeal set
out in the Notice of Appeal are as follows: <o:p></o:p>"(a) The decision of the
Respondent dated 21st December 2017 imposing a punitive fine of Four Hundred
and Five Thousand Ghana Cedis (Ghc 405,000.00) on the <o:p></o:p>Appellant is wrongful, arbitral (sic),
discriminatory and without any legal justification. <o:p></o:p>(b) That the Respondent never made any
request on Applicant to submit any document prior to its letter dated 26th
September, 2017. Therefore the imposition of a penalty for "failing to
submit documents reasonably requested for" is without lawful justification
and the decision of the Appellant dated 21st December 2017 granting amnesty
thereon is void ab initio. <o:p></o:p>(c) The Respondent's SCHEDULE OF
PENALTIES which formed the basis of the <o:p></o:p>Appellant's (sic) decision to impose a
fine on Appellant was not laid before parliament and if it was laid at all,
same was not published in the gazette the day it was laid as required by
Article 11(7) of the Constitution of Ghana consequently same is wrongful and or
void in law. <o:p></o:p>(d) That even if the Respondent's
gazetted schedule of Penalties is lawful same cannot prescribe and impose any
amount that exceeds the highest penalty/fine prescribed by the parliament of
Ghana for infractions of the law and rules governing <o:p></o:p>Telecommunications in Ghana. <o:p></o:p>(e) That if at all the schedule of
penalty is lawful which with respect is doubtful, the Respondent has by its
decision dated 21st December 2017 arrogated to itself legislative authority of
amending the schedule contrary to law. <o:p></o:p>(f) That by serving invoices/bills of
the requisite statutory charges including annual regulatory and spectrum
charges on the Appellant and accepting payments of same from the appellant from
2012 to 2017 as well as accepting the renewal application fee and the
provisional Authorization fee of one Thousand Nine Hundred and Twenty Five
Ghana Cedis (Ghc 1,925.00) and Eight Thousand and Fifty Five Ghana Cedis (Ghc
8,855.00) respectively without any objection, the Respondent has, by its act or
omission, intentionally and deliberately by conduct caused or permitted the <o:p></o:p>Appellant to believe that it was in
good standing and it is estopped thereby from revoking Appellant's
Authorization/closing down it station for operating without valid authorization
and/or imposing a punitive fine on the Appellant|CE <o:p></o:p>(g) That the Respondent having
failed/refused to request for any outstanding document before imposing the
penalty on the Appellant by its letter dated 26th <o:p></o:p>September 2017, the said penalty was
unlawful and contravenes section 13 of Act Act (sic) 775 and N7 of the
Respondent's Schedule of Penalties. <o:p></o:p>(h) That the Respondent's conduct in
imposing the punitive fine on the Appellant is unreasonable as same failed to
comply with the mandatory requirements of law reasonable standards of
procedural fairness and observance of the rules of Natural <o:p></o:p>Justice contrary to Article 23 of the
Constitution of Ghana and section 25 of the National Communication Authority
Act 2008 (Act 769). <o:p></o:p>(i) That the Respondent exercised its
discretion arbitrary (sic) and contrary to law when it accepted the renewal
application fee and the provisional Authorization fee of one Thousand Nine
Hundred and Twenty Five Ghana Cedis and Eight Thousand Eight hundred and Fifty
Five Ghana Cedis respectively but rejected the only outstanding document duly
submitted by the Appellant within the Statutory period. <o:p></o:p>(1) Tha</main>