ADDO ATUAH & CO. vs. EUROGET DE-INVEST S.A. [2015]DLHC4251

Date	2015-12-21
Suit No.	SUIT NO. RPC/141/2014
Citation No.	[2015]DLHC4251

SAMUEL K. A. ASIEDU

MR. FRANCIS S. BOATENG FOR THE PLAINTIFF

MATILDA ROBERO FOR S. ARHIN FOR THE DEFENDANT

[2015]DLHC4251
																																						<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" ><a name="OLE_LINK1">ADDO ATUAH &amp; CO.<o:p></o:p></a>vs.<o:p></o:p>EUROGET DE-INVEST S.A.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>&nbsp;[HIGH COURT (COMMERCIAL DIVISION), ACCRA]<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">

SUIT NO. RPC/141/2014&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: 21ST DECEMBER, 2015 <o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>MR. FRANCIS S. BOATENG FOR THE PLAINTIFF<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">

SAMUEL K. A. ASIEDU,
JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o: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="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:center;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>The plaintiff’s claim against the defendant
is for<o:p></o:p><ol style="margin-top:0in" start="1" type="a">
 <li class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: justify; border: none;">An order for the recovery of the sum of
 US$2,250,000 being debt due and owing on account of legal fees for
 professional legal services rendered by the plaintiff to the defendant for
 and concerning the implementation of the construction of eight (8)
 hospitals for the Ministry of Health and one (1) military hospital in
 Kumasi for the Ministry of Defence by the defendant which the defendant
 has refused/failed to pay despite several demands.<o:p></o:p></li>
 <li class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: justify; border: none;">Interest on the sum of US$2,250,000 at
 the going commercial bank rate of interest on the US dollar from October
 2008 up to and inclusive of the date of final payment.<o:p></o:p></li>
 <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; border: none;">Costs including
 lawyer’s fees.<o:p></o:p></li>
</ol>The defendant caused Appearance to be entered
on its behalf after the service of the writ and the statement of claim and
thereafter, the defendant filed its defence. After the inability of the parties
to settle at pre-trial, the case was set down for hearing at which the
plaintiff gave evidence per Addo Atuah and then called one witness to close its
case. The defendant did not call any of its officers to testify at the trial
but it called one witness to give evidence on its behalf.<o:p></o:p>From the pleadings it is clear that the main
issues between the parties are whether or not the defendant herein engaged the
services of the plaintiff in 2008 or thereabout and if so, whether or not the
parties agreed that the defendant will pay to the plaintiff as its remuneration
0.5% of the total contract sum or value and finally whether or not the
plaintiff rendered professional legal services to the defendant.<o:p></o:p>In respect of the first issue the plaintiff
has pleaded in paragraph 3 of its statement of claim that in the year 2008 the
defendant engaged its services as lawyers to provide professional legal
services to the defendant concerning the construction of hospitals for the
Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Defence. The defendant has flatly denied
this allegation by the plaintiff in paragraph 4 of its statement of defence and
gone ahead in paragraph11 thereof to state emphatically that it has never
engaged the services of the plaintiff to perform any work for it. By the rules
of evidence therefore, as stated in sections 14 and 17 of the Evidence Act 1975
NRCD 323, it becomes the duty of the plaintiff to adduce cogent and credible
evidence to prove and show that in fact its services was procured by the
defendant as alleged. Thus, in Ababio
vs. Akwasi III [1994-1995] GBR 774 it was held that: <o:p></o:p>“A party whose
pleading raised an issue essential to the success of the case assumed the
burden of proving such issue. The burden only shifted to the [other party] when
[such a party] had adduced evidence to establish the claim”<o:p></o:p>The court has also explained in the recent
case of Okudzeto Ablakwa (No. 2) vs.
Attorney General &amp; Another [2012] 2 SCGLR 845 at 867 that <o:p></o:p>“If a person goes to
court to make an allegation, the onus is on him to lead evidence to prove that
allegation, unless the allegation is admitted. If he fails to do that, the
ruling on that allegation will go against him. Stated more explicitly, a party
cannot win a case </main>