HEILAND RESOURCES LTD. vs. SINOPEC INTERNATIONAL PETROLEUM SERVICES LIMITED, SINOPEC JIANGSU & 5 ORS [2022]DLCA11781

HEILAND RESOURCES LTD. vs. SINOPEC INTERNATIONAL PETROLEUM SERVICES LIMITED, SIN... [2022]DLCA11781

Date	2022-07-28
Suit No.	SUIT NO. H1/104/2022
Citation No.	[2022]DLCA11781

M. WELBOURNE (MRS)

J.A. (PRESIDING)

M. WOOD

(MRS.) J.A.

E. BAAH

J.A.

SEFAKOR KUENYEHIA WITH EYRAM FOSU AND ESINAM AWOONOR FOR PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT/APPELLANT

NYAABIIRE NSOBILLA ATINDAANA FOR 3RD DEFENDANT/APPLICANT/RESPONDENT

[2022]DLCA11781
																																						<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" >HEILAND RESOURCES LTD.<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT/APPELLANT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>SINOPEC INTERNATIONAL PETROLEUM SERVICES LIMITED, SINOPEC
JIANGSU &amp; 5 ORS<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANTS)<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;">

SUIT
NO. H1/104/2022&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 JULY 2022<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL<o:p></o:p>SEFAKOR
KUENYEHIA WITH EYRAM FOSU AND ESINAM AWOONOR FOR PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT/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;">

NYAABIIRE NSOBILLA ATINDAANA FOR 3RD DEFENDANT/APPLICANT/RESPONDENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>&nbsp;CORAM<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="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:
justify;line-height:normal;tab-stops:36.0pt 72.0pt 108.0pt 144.0pt 180.0pt 216.0pt 252.0pt 288.0pt 373.15pt;
border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0cm;
mso-padding-alt:0cm 0cm 1.0pt 0cm">M. WELBOURNE (MRS), J.A. (PRESIDING), M. WOOD, (MRS.) J.A.,
E. BAAH, J.A.<o:p></o:p>

</div>&nbsp;<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="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
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">JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>WELBOURNE, J.A<o:p></o:p>This
is an appeal against the Ruling of the High Court dated 6th July,
2021. <o:p></o:p>This case ought to ordinarily have been concluded by now
if the parties were ad idem as far as
the forum for dispute resolution goes whether per Arbitration or through
adjudication.<o:p></o:p>It is interesting that the parties intention as stated in
clause 16 of the Lateral Line Contract was to submit “all disputes”&nbsp; to Arbitration in accordance with Section 6
of the Ghana Arbitration Act (Act 798). <o:p></o:p>What was the genesis of the dispute? The&nbsp; Plaintiff/Respondent/Appellant’s carried out works as a sub-contractor
on the orders or requests of the 3rd Defendant/Applicant/Respondent
on the project, which works were not specifically spelt out in the “Scope of
Works” as detailed in the Agreement Attachment 1 of the Agreement (see page 75
of the ROA).<o:p></o:p>All these works were quantified by the Respondent and
according to the Appellant fully paid for by the Government of Ghana. The
logical thing was for the Respondent to pay the Appellant for the works done
but was that the case? The Respondent failed and or refused to do so for a
project commenced in 2013/2014 to date. Details of these sums payable to the
Appellant run into millions of US Dollars. (see pages 14- 15 and 198 of the
ROA). This is the gravamen of the dispute.<o:p></o:p>On 24th July 2020, the Appellant made a
Demand for Arbitration (see pages 116 to 185 of ROA) Exhibit TA10 - Stating the
said claims as was subsequently spelt out in the Statement of Claim.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;Interestingly, the Respondent objected to the demand
for Arbitration by the Appellant on the ground that there were no separate
contracts that were covered by a written Arbitration Agreement.<o:p></o:p>The Appellant on second thoughts, withdrew the Demand
for Arbitration and filed a suit in court dated 20th November, 2020,
where upon the Respondent made a volte face and called for the matter to be
referred to Arbitration quoting clause 16 of the Lateral Line Contract on the Atuabo Gas Project.<o:p></o:p>The matter was argued by the parties before the court
below and the learned judge referred the matter to Arbitration. It is from this
ruling that the Appellant has appealed on the grounds as stated below. <o:p></o:p>As an avid proponent of the Alternative Dispute
Resolution mechanism and in line with the Biblical admonition in Matthew
Chapter 5 verses 25-26; “(25) Settle
matters quickly with your adversary who is taking you to court. Do it while you
are still together on the way, or your adversary may hand you over to the
judge, and the judge may hand you over to the officer, and you may be thrown
into prison; (26) Truly I tell you, you will not get out until you have paid
the last penny”; I would have quickly affirmed the ruling of my learned sister
of the court below. The case of BCM
Ghana Ltd v Ashanti Goldfields Ltd ( Civil Appeal No J4/17/2005 the Supreme
Court also stated that courts should strive to uphold dispute resolution
clauses in agreements. <o:p></o:p>However, the law enjoins me to scrupulously peruse the
record of appeal, consider the submissions of both counsel on the pros and cons, &nbsp;and arrive at an informed decision. I proceed
to do so.&nbsp;&nbsp;