[2015]DLCA6729 Login to Read Full Case <span style="font-size: 18px !important;"><p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center;line-height:115%"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height: 115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif";color:#00B0F0">INTERNATIONAL ROM LIMITED<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center;line-height:115%"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height: 115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif";color:#00B0F0">vs.<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center;line-height:115%"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height: 115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif";color:#00B0F0">VODAFONE LIMITED & ANOR<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center;line-height:115%"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">[COURT OF APPEAL, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p></span></p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt; padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in"> <p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center;line-height:115%; border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0in; mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height: 115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">CIVIL APPEAL SUIT NO: H1/161/2013 DATE: 26<sup>TH</sup> MARCH, 2015<o:p></o:p></span></p> </div><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height: 115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">MR. KOFI SOMUAH BEING LED BY MR. TONY LITHUR FOR 1ST APPELLANT <o:p></o:p></span></p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt; padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%;border:none; mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">MR. EMMANUEL AMOFA FOR RESPONDENT<o:p></o:p></span></p> </div><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height: 115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">CORAM: <o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">KUSI-APPIAH (PRESIDING), KORBIEH J.A., WELBOURNE (MRS.) J.A. <o:p></o:p></span></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;line-height:115%; 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"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height: 115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p></span></b></p> </div><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height: 115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">KUSI-APPIAH, J.A <o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">This is an appeal against the decision of the High Court (Commercial Division), Accra dated 15th May, 2013 in favour of the plaintiff/ respondent against the 1st defendant /appellant. I will refer to the parties in the manner they appeared at the court below. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">The case of the plaintiff as gathered from its pleadings and evidence at the trial was that, it entered into a number of contracts with the 1st defendant, the first, dated 17th December, 2003 (Exhibit A) as amended by a Supplementary Frame Contract dated 26st January, 2005 (Exhibit B) for the supply, delivery, installation, testing, commissioning, maintenance and support services for 1st defendant’s expansion network. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">According to the plaintiff, it subsequently executed another contract with the 1st defendant, dated 13th May, 2008 (Exhibit C) and 2nd October, 2008 (Exhibit D) in respect of the 1st defendant’s expansion of its network aforesaid. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">The plaintiff contended that although it faithfully and diligently executed the works contained in the respective contracts, the 1st defendant failed to make available the required funds to enable the plaintiff to undertake the assignment. Consequently, the plaintiff was compelled to borrow from financial institutions at costs with high interest rates to its detriment to complete the assignments stipulated under the contracts – Exhibits A, B, C and D. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">It is the case of the plaintiff that upon completion of the civil works, the 1st defendant took over possession of the works for its operations and services. However, the 1st defendant failed to heed to the several reminders by the plaintiff to comply with the terms of the contract for its outstanding payments. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">The plaintiff testified that while demanding its outstanding payment from the 1st defendant, the 1st defendant by a letter dated 8th May, 2009 wrongfully terminated the contract between the plaintiff and 1st defendant. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">On 19th August, 2009, the plaintiff by its writ of summons, therefore brought an action against the 1st defendant for the following reliefs: <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><i><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height: 115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">"i. Plaintiff claims from the defendant a total outstanding of US$4,893,057.08 being unpaid bills by the defendant on due dates arising from works executed by plaintiff as contained in the contracts of 17th December, 2003 with the amendments and 13th May, 2008 respectively for works executed and taken over by the defendant but has refused to settle. <o:p></o:p></span></i></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><i><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height: 115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">ii. an order for accounts or reconciliation of accounts between the two parties in respect of the two named contracts to verify the outstanding unpaid bills. <o:p></o:p></span></i></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><i><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height: 115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">iii. Declaration that the said termination of the contract of 13<sup>th</sup> May, 2008 and 28th May, 2009 as[sic] illegal. iv. Special and general damages for breach of contract. v. Interest at the prevailing interest rate up to the date of final payment. <o:p></o:p></span></i></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><i><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height: 115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">vi. Costs." <o:p></o:p></span></i></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">The 1st defendant resisted the plaintiff’s claim by its amended statement of defence and counterclaim filed on 28th June, 2010 and stated that the plaintiff is not entitled to any of the reliefs claimed or at all. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">It is the case of the 1st defendant that it entered into an agreement or contract with International Rom Limited, a company with its registered office in Mauritius in December, 2003 and subsequently amended the contract in the year 2005. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">According to the 1st defendant on 13th May, 2008, plaintiff, the Ghanaian registered International Rom Ltd. entered into an agreement with 1st defendant effective from 1st October, 2007 to 31st December, 2008 under which plaintiff was awarded 41 sites for the construction of telecommunications mast and civil works associated with communication towers. The 1st defendant contended that International Rom Ltd. was a Mauritius registered company different from the plaintiff and that it had fully paid the International Rom Ltd. registered in Mauritius. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">The 1st defendant alleged that on 12th August, 2008, the 2nd defendant extended a GH¢1.5million facility to plaintiff to finance the construction of the 41 sites against an undertaking from 1st defendant to pay all proceeds from the contract in the joint names of plaintiff and 2nd defendant. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Book Antiqua","serif"">However, the 1st defendant further alleged that the plaintiff did not meet the technical specification under the contract because it detected defects in the actual value of the work performed by the plaintiff. Besides, the 1st defendant claimed that the plaintiff failed to complete the works within the period prescribed under the contract and therefore withdrew a number of the sites from the plaintiff. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" st