DANIEL ADDO vs. PSC TEMA SHIPYARD LIMITED [2016]DLHC4211

Date	2016-03-24
Suit No.	SUIT NO. BDC 47/2014
Citation No.	[2016]DLHC4211

SAMUEL K. A. ASIEDU

MR. MBEAH FOR THE PLAINTIFF

MR. KWEKU ADU MINTAH FOR THE DEFENDANT

[2016]DLHC4211
																																						<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">DANIEL ADDO<o:p></o:p></a>vs.<o:p></o:p>PSC TEMA SHIPYARD LIMITED<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. BDC 47/2014&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; &nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;DATE:
24TH MARCH, 2016 <o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>MR. MBEAH 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>

<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>By an amended writ the plaintiff claims from
the defendant<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;">Damages for breach of contract<o:p></o:p></li>
 <li class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: justify; border: none;">Order for the payment of cash the sum of
 GH₵36,000 being cost of spare parts
 supplied to the defendant and labour cost for the repair of the defendant’s mobile crane.<o:p></o:p></li>
 <li class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: justify; border: none;">Interest on the said sum of money from
 October 2012 at the current bank rate to date of final payment.<o:p></o:p></li>
 <li class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; border: none;">Cost<o:p></o:p></li>
</ol>After the close of pleadings and the failure
of pre-trial settlement, the matter was set down for hearing after the parties
had filed their witness statements. At the trial, the plaintiff gave evidence
and called one witness to close his case. The defendant also gave evidence per
the Head of Human Resource and Administration and then called one witness to
close its case.<o:p></o:p>From the pleadings filed by the parties, it
is not in dispute that the plaintiff is a mechanic. It is also not in dispute
that the defendant is a shipyard company which repair ships. The court also
finds from the pleadings that there has been a contractual or working
relationship between the parties in view of the admission by the defendant that
the plaintiff some time ago repaired the defendant’s compressor and also
changed the engine of the defendant’s Neoplan bus from a 6 cylinder to 8
cylinder engine and for which work, the defendant paid the plaintiff.<o:p></o:p>The plaintiff contends that he was contracted
by the defendant to repair the defendant’s crane which had broken down.
According to the plaintiff, as a result of the said contract, he purchased
various parts to repair the crane and that whiles the work was ongoing, there
was a change in the management of the defendant company after which the new managing
director of the company ordered the plaintiff to stop work even before he could
finish executing the contract. The plaintiff then put in a claim for the cost
incurred by him but the defendant refused to reimburse the plaintiff alleging
that no contract ever existed between the defendant and the plaintiff. The
plaintiff therefore initiated the instant suit claiming the reliefs endorsed on
the writ of summons. The following issues arise for determination from the
pleadings: Whether or not there is a contract between the plaintiff and the
defendant for the repair of the defendant’s crane; whether or not the plaintiff
supplied spare parts to the defendant; whether or not the plaintiff has
repaired the defendant’s crane; whether or not the defendant is in breach of
contract and finally whether or not the plaintiff is entitled to his claim. <o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>CONTRACT FOR THE
REPAIR OF CRANE<o:p></o:p>On the issue whether or not there is a
contract between the plaintiff and the defendant for the repair of the
defendant’s crane, the plaintiff’s pleading and evidence is that he was
verbally contracted, in 2012, by the defendant per Mr. Seth Kugblenu the then
managing director of the defendant company to repair the crane of the defendant
which had then broken down. The plaintiff stated </main>