C. C. W LIMITED vs. ACCRA METROPOLITAN ASSEMBLY [2021]DLSC10162

Date	2021-03-31
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL NO. J4/30/2020
Citation No.	[2021]DLSC10162

YEBOAH CJ (PRESIDING)

PWAMANG JSC

AMEGATCHER JS

OWUSU (MS.) JSC

HONYENUGA JSC

TONY LITHUR FOR PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT

AKAWARI -LINURU ATINDEM (STATE ATTORNEY) FOR DEFENDANT/APPLICANT/APPELLANT

[2021]DLSC10162
																																						<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" >C. C. W LIMITED<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>ACCRA METROPOLITAN ASSEMBLY<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANT/APPLICANT/APPELLANT)<o:p></o:p>[SUPREME
COURT, 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;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:
solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0cm;mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">CIVIL APPEAL NO. J4/30/2020&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: 31ST MARCH, 2021<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>TONY LITHUR FOR PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT.<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;">

AKAWARI
-LINURU ATINDEM (STATE ATTORNEY) FOR DEFENDANT/APPLICANT/APPELLANT.<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
<o:p></o:p>YEBOAH
CJ (PRESIDING), PWAMANG JSC, AMEGATCHER JS, OWUSU (MS.) JSC, HONYENUGA JSC <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;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;HONYENUGA,
JSC:-<o:p></o:p>INTRODUCTION<o:p></o:p>The
instant appeal emanates from the Ruling of the High Court on a motion on notice
for leave to levy execution in which the High court granted the application in
favour of the plaintiff/respondent/ respondent as against the defendant/applicant/appellant
for the payment of Nine million, two hundred and one thousand, eight hundred
and fifteen US Dollars (US$9,201,815.29). Dissatisfied with the decision of the
High Court, the defendant/applicant/appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal
which also dismissed the appeal and affirmed the decision of the High
Court.&nbsp; Being aggrieved with the Judgment
of the Court of Appeal, the defendant/applicant/appellant filed an appeal to
this court.&nbsp; In this opinion, the
defendant/applicant/appellant would be simply referred to as the appellant
while the plaintiff/respondent/respondent would be referred to as the
respondent. <o:p></o:p>BACKGROUND<o:p></o:p>The
background facts of this case are that by an agreement dated the 4th
December 1997, the appellant engaged the respondent to render waste disposal
services including landfill services within the city of Accra.&nbsp; However, the respondent commenced work only
for the appellant to terminate the agreement. Being aggrieved, the respondent
issued a writ at the Fast Track High Court claiming for an order compelling the
appellant to pay to the respondent an amount equivalent in Cedis of US$10, 207,
718.51 at the prevailing forex bureau rate on the date of actual payment being
the cost of services provided, interest on the sum mentioned until the date of
Judgment, damages for breach of contract, loss of profit, further or other
reliefs and costs. The appellant counterclaimed for a declaration that the
procedure adopted in awarding the contract to the respondent was improper,
irregular against public policy and illegal and therefore the agreement is null
and void.&nbsp; The appellant also claimed for
re-negotiation of the clauses that were inimical to it and sought an order for
the respondent to pay for the use of its vehicles, equipment, offices among
others.&nbsp; It claimed interest on any
amount due from the respondent to it and for an order to reconcile accounts.<o:p></o:p>At
the end of the trial, the learned trial Judge, delivered Judgment in favour of
the Respondent and concluded as follows:<o:p></o:p>“I would refuse these claims of the
defendant.&nbsp; In conclusion of this case
the plaintiff will be entitled against the defendant to the sum of 715, 628.5
metric tons x US$18 dollars payable in cedis at the current inter forex bureau
exchange rate.&nbsp; From this amount will be
deducted the figure of ¢133, 400.00 [old cedis] owed the defendant for the use
of the waste management premises.”<o:p></o:p>The
appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal but the court dismissed the appeal as
being without any merit.<o:p></o:p>Upon
the dismissal of its appeal, the appellant further appealed to the Supreme
Court and on the 13th February, 2008, this court affirmed the
decision of the High Court as follows:-<o:p></o:p>“Accordingly, we order that the defendant should pay
the plaintiff the net award made by the learned trial court Judge in the
passage above.&nbsp; In accordance with the
Court (Award of Interest and Post Judgment Interest) Rules, 2005 (CI.52), the
defendant is ordered to pay interest on the amount awarded to the plaintiff at
the bank rate prevailing today with effect from the date of termination of the
contract, that is 29 June, 2001 till the date of payment.<o:p></o:p>In effect, then, though we hereby reverse the
Court of Appeal finding that the contract was not illegal, the appeal is
dismissed and the orders of the learned trial Judge affirmed with the
supplementary order that interest be paid.”<o:p></o:p>It
is noteworthy that the Judgment of this court is reported as CCW LTD V. Accra
Metropolitan Assembly [2007 – 2008] SCGLR 409.<o:p></o:p>