SAMPSON ESSIAM vs. FEMME ARCH CONSULT & ANOR [2021]DLCA11031

Date	2021-10-28
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL SUIT NO. H1/200/2018
Citation No.	[2021]DLCA11031

SENYO DZAMEFE JA (PRESIDING)

P BRIGHT MENSAH JA

NOVISI ARYENE (MRS) JA

J. A. LARKAI FOR APPELLANT

PHILLIPA DENNIES FOR RESPONDENT

[2021]DLCA11031
																																						<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" >SAMPSON ESSIAM<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>FEMME ARCH CONSULT &amp; ANOR<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANT/APPELLANT)<o:p></o:p>[COURT OF APPEAL, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p><div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; padding: 0cm 0cm 1pt;">

<p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:
.0001pt;mso-add-space:auto;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">CIVIL
APPEAL SUIT NO. H1/200/2018&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: 28TH OCTOBER,
2021<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL<o:p></o:p>J. A. LARKAI FOR APPELLANT<o:p></o:p><div style="border-top: none; border-right: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; padding: 0cm 0cm 1pt;">

<p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-add-space:auto;text-align:justify;line-height:115%;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:
solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">PHILLIPA
DENNIES FOR RESPONDENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>SENYO DZAMEFE JA (PRESIDING), P BRIGHT MENSAH
JA, NOVISI ARYENE (MRS) JA<o:p></o:p><div style="border-top-width: 1.5pt; border-top-color: windowtext; border-left: none; border-bottom-width: 1.5pt; border-bottom-color: windowtext; border-right: none; padding: 1pt 0cm;">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
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:0cm;mso-padding-alt:1.0pt 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>&nbsp;NOVISI
ARYENE JA<o:p></o:p>Dissatisfied
with the judgment of the High Court, (Commercial Division), Accra, delivered on
29th August 2014, the defendant filed the instant appeal on 26th
of November 2014. His prayer is for an order setting aside the judgment and
costs awarded, and for a further order for the parties to assess the work done
by the plaintiff. In this appeal, the appellants shall be referred to as
defendants, and the respondent as plaintiff.<o:p></o:p>1st
defendant is a firm of architectural consultants and 2nd defendant
is the Managing Director of 1st defendant. Sometime in September
2002, at the invitation of defendants, plaintiff, a Structural Engineer operating
under the business name and style of Ela Engineering, joined a consortium of
Architects, Quantity Surveyors, Structural Engineers, Mechanical Engineers and
Electrical Engineers for the construction of the Maritime Clinic for the Ghana
Ports and Harbours Authority at Tema and a multipurpose block for the School of
Allied Health Sciences at Korle-Bu. The Korle-Bu project was later relocated to
the Legon campus. <o:p></o:p>Plaintiff
averred that he was assigned the design and supervision of the civil/structural
engineering services and was also given additional services beyond the scope of
civil/structural engineering services for the Allied Health Sciences project. On
the instructions of 2nd defendant he did the surveying and mapping
of the site, he engaged the services of land surveyors who prepared the site
plan and topography plan for the five storey multi-purpose building at Korle Bu
and submitted same to 2nd defendant who prepared the architectural
drawings. On receipt of the drawings from 2nd defendant, he prepared
an electronic copy of the drawings and gave same to 1st defendant.
Same was then submitted to the quantity surveyors to prepare the bill of
quantities for the project.<o:p></o:p>When
the project was relocated to the University of Ghana Campus, on instructions of
defendants, he prepared a plan for the seven storey multi-purpose building, and
engaged the services of land surveyors to prepare site and topography plans.
The plans were given to 2nd defendant for the designs. Plaintiff
subsequently carried out structural analysis and design based on which Lemet
Construction, the contractor, won the tender. <o:p></o:p>With
respect to the Maritime Clinic project, plaintiff averred that on defendants’
instructions, he prepared the road traffic data collection, designed the access
road to the proposed clinic and also did the civil and structural designing for
the project and gave the electronic soft copy to one of defendants’ officers.<o:p></o:p>Plaintiff
avers that according to the code of practice of professionals on distribution
of fees as pleaded in paragraphs 17 to 19 of the amended statement of claim,
defendants were entitled to 4% as fees, however they claimed 8.5%. And that
this prompted him to question the basis for the distribution. The enquiry was
however met with the termination of the contract on 16th May 2005, by
defendants who contended that plaintiff delayed in submitting his work to the
client. Plaintiff’s case is that the termination of his services was wrong in
law. Per writ of summons filed on 03/11/2008 and subsequently amended, he is
seeking the following reliefs:<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
I.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
General damages for wrongful termination of
services.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
II.