[2011]DLCA7955 Login to Read Full Case <span style="font-size: 18px !important;"><p class="MsoNoSpacing" align="center" style="text-align:center;line-height:115%"><b><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif;color:#00B0F0">THE REPUBLIC<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt; text-align:center"><b><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif; mso-bidi-font-family:"Book Antiqua";color:#00B0F0">vs.<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNoSpacing" align="center" style="text-align:center;line-height:115%"><b><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif;color:#00B0F0">THE REGIONAL ENGINEER, DEPT. OF FEEDER ROADS CAPE COAST<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNoSpacing" align="center" style="text-align:center;line-height:115%"><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Book Antiqua", serif;">(</span></i><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif">RESPONDENT/APPELLANTS</span></i><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: "Book Antiqua", serif;">)</span></i><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif"><o:p></o:p></span></i></p><p class="MsoNoSpacing" align="center" style="text-align:center;line-height:115%"><b><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif;color:#00B0F0">EX-PARTE: SARASWATI CIVIL & BUILDING CONSTRUCTION CO. LTD. TEMA (PER THE MANAGING DIRECTOR)<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNoSpacing" align="center" style="text-align:center;line-height:115%"><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:10.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif">(APPLICANT/RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p></span></i></p><p class="MsoNoSpacing" align="center" style="text-align:center;line-height:115%"><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:10.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></i></p><p class="MsoNoSpacing" align="center" style="text-align:center;line-height:115%"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif">[COURT OF APPEAL, CAPE COAST]<o:p></o:p></span></p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt; padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm"> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" align="center" style="text-align:center;line-height:115%; border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0cm; mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm"><b><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif">SUIT NO.H1/115/2011 </span></b><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%; font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif"> DATE: 9<sup>TH</sup> NOVEMBER, 2011<b><o:p></o:p></b></span></p> </div><p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="line-height:115%"><b><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Book Antiqua",serif">COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="line-height:115%"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif">MR. ERIC ASUMADU FOR APPLICANT/RESPONDENT<o:p></o:p></span></p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt; padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm"> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="line-height:115%;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt: solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif">MRS. HANNAH TAYLOR, PRINCIPAL STATE ATTORNEY FOR RESPONDENT/APPELLANT<o:p></o:p></span></p> </div><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt"><b><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif;mso-bidi-font-family:"Book Antiqua"">CORAM:<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt; padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm"> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="line-height:115%;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt: solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif">MARFUL-SAU JA (PRESIDING), HONYENUGA JA, SIR DENNIS ADJEI JA<o:p></o:p></span></p> </div><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt"><b><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif;mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri"><o:p> </o:p></span></b></p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt; padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm"> <p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt; text-align:center;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt; padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm"><b><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Book Antiqua",serif;mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri">JUDGMENT</span></b><b><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif"> </span></b><b><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif;mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri"><o:p></o:p></span></b></p> </div><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><b><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Book Antiqua",serif">MARFUL-SAU, JA: -</span></b><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif"> This appeal is against the ruling of the High Court sitting at Cape Coast dated the 25<sup>th</sup> October, 2007. In that ruling the trial High Court, dismissed the application by the respondent/ appellant praying the court to set aside an award delivered by a referee in arbitration proceedings. In this appeal the Department of Feeder Roads will be referred to as the appellant and Saraswati Civil and Building Construction Co. Ltd. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif">will be the respondent.<b><u><o:p></o:p></u></b></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif">The brief facts of the case are that the Government of Ghana through the Central Regional Coordinating Council awarded two contracts to the respondent. These contracts were the Surfacing of the Bisease Town Roads which was to be executed within 12 months and the Surfacing of the Eshiem, Bisease, Anyinasu Feeder Road also to be executed within 12 months. However, by a letter dated the 20<sup>th</sup> May, 2004, the Regional Tender Board terminated the two contracts. This letter is at page 40 and 179 of the record of appeal. Paragraph 2 of the letter which is of interest states thus:-<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt;text-align:justify;text-indent: 4.5pt"><b><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif">‘’ You are therefore advised to call at this office within one (1) month from the date of this letter for a joint site inspection and measurement on your outstanding claims if any to enable us prepare you FINAL ACCOUNT’’<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif">From the record it is clear that the parties to the contract could not mutually agree on the outstanding amount due to the respondent herein, consequently, the respondent filed two applications in the High Court, Cape Coast praying that the dispute between the parties be referred to arbitration as per clause 67 of the Contract executed by the parties for the works. It is important to state that the Contract signed by the parties herein for the works by its clause 67, significantly, contained elaborate dispute resolution mechanism other than litigation. The parties under the contract choose arbitration as the main method of resolving any dispute that may arise from the execution of the contract.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif">On the application of the respondent the trial High Court on the 23rd March, 2005 referred the parties to arbitration in an order found at page 289 of the record. The order of the court which served as the reference to the arbitrator or referee is as follows:-<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><b><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Book Antiqua",serif"> ‘’RULING;<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt;text-align:justify"><b><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif"> Having heard arguments from lawyers on both sides this court is of the opinion that though the contract awarded the applicant’s herein had long been terminated, it is quite proper for the conflict between the applicant and the Ministry of Roads and Highways and the Department of Feeder Roads, Central Region to be referred to an arbitration as provided by section 67(1), (3) and (4) of the contract executed between the parties. This is to ensure that any outstanding sum due to the applicant for work done before the determination of the contract is paid to the applicant. There shall be no order as to costs.’’<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua",serif">Clearly, from the order above the reference to arbitration was for the arbitrator to determine any outstanding amount due to the respondent herein, before the contract was determined on the 29<sup>th</sup> May, 2004. In other words the arbitrator or referee was to resolve the dispute as to whether or not the respondent was entitled to any outstanding amount for works executed. As a result of this order, the parties were thus obliged to start the arbitration under the contract. At page 238 of the record is a letter from Delin Consult dated the 12<sup>th</sup> January, 2006 which made reference to a telephone conversation between one Ing. M.L. Quarshie of Delin Consult and Ing. Sarfoh of Hitracs Consult concerning the intended arbitration between the parties in this appeal. This letter which was addressed to the Executive Se