BLUE BASIC HOTELS LIMITED vs. CAPITAL VIEW HOTELS LIMITED [2015]DLCA8401

Date	2015-10-27
Suit No.	SUIT NO: H1/09/2015
Citation No.	[2015]DLCA8401

ADJEI JA – PRESIDING

CECILIA H. SOWAH JA

HENRY KWOFIE JA

YAW OWUSU ADDO ESQ FOR THE PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT

NANA SAKYEIWAA FOR THE DEFENDANT/APPELLANT

[2015]DLCA8401
																																						<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://www.dennislawgh.com/dl-assets/dl-images/lock-content.png"
																				alt="Subscription based content">
																		</div>
																	</div>
																	 
																		<a href="https://www.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" >BLUE BASIC HOTELS LIMITED<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF/
RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,serif;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0">vs.<o:p></o:p>CAPITAL VIEW HOTELS LIMITED<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANT/ APPELLANT)<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>[COURT OF APPEAL, KOFORIDUA]<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

SUIT NO: H1/09/2015&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; &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: 27TH OCT, 2015<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>YAW OWUSU ADDO ESQ FOR THE PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

NANA SAKYEIWAA FOR
THE DEFENDANT/APPELLANT<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">

ADJEI JA – PRESIDING,
CECILIA H. SOWAH JA, HENRY KWOFIE JA<o:p></o:p>

</div>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o: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">JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>ADJEI,
J.A:<o:p></o:p>The Defendant / Appellant who would be referred to
in this appeal as the Defendant dissatisfied with the Judgment entered against
it by the High Court Koforidua on 12th November, 2013 in favour of
the plaintiff / Respondent filed an appeal against the said judgment. For the
purpose of this appeal, the Plaintiff / Respondent would be referred to as the
plaintiff.<o:p></o:p>The facts of this case are quite complicated as
each of the parties gives different accounts of the facts. The plaintiffs case
is that the defendant engaged it to offer consultancy services and technical
support to develop and construct a hotel in Koforidua in two places. The plaintiff
was entitled to six percent the project which was finally assessed as total
cost of GH¢45,000.00. The six percent of the total cost of the project was the
agreed fee payable to it by the defendant. After the construction of the hotel,
the defendant further engaged the plaintiff to manage it for a fee of ten
percent of the annual net profit accruing therefrom. According to the
plaintiff, the defendant has wilfully refused to pay both fees which are due and
payable and it is therefore entitled to interest on both sums of monies and the
interest thereon from the date they became due and payable. &nbsp;&nbsp;<o:p></o:p>The defendant on the other hand contends that it
did not engage the services of the plaintiff to render consultancy services and
technical support and there is not any contractual relationship between it and
the plaintiff. The defendant on the question of the ten percent of the net
profit payable to the plaintiff, the defendant stated that they initially
agreed on five percent and it later on proposed for seven percent. It denied
agreeing with the plaintiff to pay six percent as consultancy services and
technical support fees.<o:p></o:p>The trial High Court Judge made the relevant findings
which form the basis for the judgment he entered in favour of the plaintiff.
The trial High Court judge finally found the defendant liable and gave judgment
against it. The defendant dissatisfied with the judgment appealed against same
to this Court.<o:p></o:p>The grounds of appeal contained in the Notice of
appeal filed on 9th January, 2014 are as follows:<o:p></o:p>“(i)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The Court below
erred in its finding that there was an agreement for plaintiff / Appellant to
provide technical and consultancy services by Defendant / Respondent. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<o:p></o:p>(ii) The Court below erred in its
finding that there was an agreement on fees to be paid to plaintiff / Appellant
for the provision of technical and consultancy services.<o:p></o:p>(iii)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The Court below
erred in its finding that there was an agreement on management fees of 10% to
be paid to plaintiff / Appellant.<o:p></o:p>(iv)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The Judgment of
the Court below is against the weight of the evidence”.<o:p></o:p>We shall discuss the grounds of appeal as argued
by the defendant in its written submission and responded by the plaintiff. The
issue to resolve here is whether or not there was an evidence to support the
finding by the trial High court that the parties herein entered into an
agreement in which the plaintiff was to provide technical and cons</main>