The court noted that the NLA had the legal right to reduce the
commission because under the Authority’s Act (Act 722 Section 28) it
was empowered by its Governing Board to determine commissions that
should be paid to Lotto Marketing Companies (LMCs).
According to the court, the NLA had procured Portable Automatic
Data ticketing machines which could be used by the Association of LMCs
and the National Lottery Receivers Union for other purposes such as
money transfer, payment of utility bills which were all to their
advantage.
Mr Justice F. G. Kobieh, a Court of Appeal judge sitting with
additional responsibility as a High Court judge, who presided over the
case, did not award any cost to the plaintiffs, namely the National
Lottery Receivers Union and the Association of LMCs.
Last month, the NLA announced a reduction in the commission
payable to LMCs from 25 per cent to 20 per cent.The plaintiffs, however, filed a motion on notice for an interlocutory injunction praying the court for an order restraining the NLA from unilaterally reducing or reviewing downward the agreed commission payable to them.
Others joined in the suit were Mr Kojo Andah, Director General,
NLA and Authority’s Board Chairman, Dr Scali K. Agodzo.
In their statement of claim, the plaintiffs contended that they
had registered with the NLA and had the membership of 20,000.
According to them as part of their operations, they had been
licensed to distribute and sell the NLA’s lotto coupons on agreed
commission basis.
The plaintiffs said by virtue of previous agreed terms over the
years, the NLA paid them 25 per cent as commission of any sales made
to cover their overhead expenses.
However, the plaintiffs said, the defendants had threatened and
unilaterally announced the downward revision of the sales commission
payable to them from 25 per cent to 20 per cent.
According to the plaintiffs in the defendants’ bid to carry out
their threats and unilateral decision they went ahead and issued press
statements and publications in the newspapers.
The plaintiffs said the unilateral review which was to take place
with effect from February 1 this year, was without consultation with
the major stakeholders. They said this contravened organised labour laws adding the reduction of the five per cent was without merit, unjust, unconscionable and against the all known natural principles of
justice.
The plaintiffs were also seeking an order for immediate
suspension or reversal of the NLA’s decision until all negotiations
were completed.
In addition they were seeking a perpetual injunction to restrain
the defendants, their servants, assigns, workmen from reducing the
agreed percentage as well as cost. The NLA, however, opposed to the plaintiffs claims. Following the verdict, the NLA will meet this week to decide on when to implement the new commission.
Read this article: