HEILAND RESOURCES LTD. vs. SINOPEC INTERNATIONAL AND ORS [2022]DLCA15139

Date	2022-07-28
Suit No.	Suit No. H1/104/2022
Citation No.	[2022]DLCA15139

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]DLCA15139
																																						<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.<span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,serif;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Calibri Light&quot;;
mso-bidi-theme-font:major-latin;color:#00B0F0;mso-ansi-language:EN-US"><o:p></o:p>(Plaintiff/Respondent/Appellant)<o:p></o:p>vs.<span lang="en-DE" style="font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;;
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;color:#00B0F0;mso-ansi-language:#2000"><o:p></o:p>SINOPEC
INTERNATIONAL AND ORS<o:p></o:p>(Defendant/Applicant/Respondent)<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: 0in 0in 1pt;">

</div>COUNSEL<o:p></o:p>Sefakor Kuenyehia with Eyram Fosu and
Esinam Awoonor&nbsp; 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: 0in 0in 1pt;">

<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:
justify;line-height:115%;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">Nyaabiire Nsobilla
Atindaana for 3rd
Defendant/Applicant/Respondent<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM<o:p></o:p>M. Welbourne (Mrs) J.A. (Presiding), M. Wood (Mrs.) J.A.<span lang="en-DE" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,serif;mso-fareast-font-family:
&quot;Times New Roman&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;;mso-ansi-language:
#2000">, E. Baah J.A.<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 0in;">

<p class="MsoNoSpacing" align="center" style="text-align:center;border:none;
mso-border-top-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:1.0pt 0in 1.0pt 0in">JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>&nbsp;WELBOURNE, J.A<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;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</main>