ATUGUBA & ASSOCIATES v. SCIPION CAPITAL (UK) LTD & ANOR
2019
SUPREME COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- DOTSE, JSC (PRESIDING)
- BENIN, JSC
- PWAMANG, JSC
- AMEGATCHER, JSC
- KOTEY, JSC
Areas of Law
- Contract Law
- Civil Procedure
- Evidence Law
- Technology Law
2019
SUPREME COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The respondent, a UK law firm, engaged the appellant, a Ghanaian law firm, for legal services. When a dispute arose over legal fees, the appellant sued the respondent and another defendant in Ghana. The respondent's motion to be struck out of the suit was denied by the High Court but upheld by the Court of Appeal. This interlocutory appeal to the Supreme Court followed. The Supreme Court upheld the decision of the Court of Appeal to strike out the respondent, emphasizing the importance of stating specific grounds of appeal and the inadmissibility of omnibus grounds for arguing points of law. Furthermore, the court stressed the validity of electronic communications as binding contracts and highlighted the legal principles around the roles of agents and principals in contract law. Additionally, the court condemned ex-parte communications with judges.
AMEGATCHER, JSC:-
This appeal has travelled all the way to the highest court of the land when the substantive matter has been comatose for the past two years at the trial court adding to the backlog of cases awaiting trial. What is before us, therefore, is an interlocutory appeal from a ruling of the High Court to the Court of Appeal and then to this court.
The facts of this appeal do not admit of any controversy. The business operations of the respondent and the 1st defendant are in the United Kingdom. The appellant is a law firm in Ghana registered by the General Legal Council offering legal services to the public. Sometime in 2014, the respondent, also a limited liability partnership registered in the United Kingdom and offering legal services, engaged the services of the appellant to act for the 1st defendant in civil suits brought against it in the High Court in Ghana. After several correspondence, the appellant agreed to offer the legal services to the 1st defendant at agreed hourly rates. The appellant represented the 1st defendant in the courts in Ghana, but a dispute arose between the appellant and the 1st defendant regarding the invoices sent by the appellant for payment of legal fees. When this could not be resolved, the appellant commenced legal action on 6th October 2016 at the High Court, Accra against the 1st defendant and the respondent for the cost of legal services rendered, interest, general damages for breach of contract and costs.
After service of the writ and statement of claim, the 1st defendant and respondent entered appearance and filed a joint statement of defence through their solicitors in Ghana. The respondent on 6th December 2016 applied to the High Court by motion to strike it out from the suit under Order 4 Rule 5 of the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2004 (C.I. 47). The parties argued the application before the High Court and in a short ruling delivered on 12th January 2017 the High Court presided over by Novisi Aryene, J ruled as follows:
“BY COURT: I have heard both counsel and read Order 4 rule 5(2). I also note that Plaintiff’s claim is for payment of Legal fees. It is not in dispute that Plaintiff rendered Legal services to the 1st Defendant introduced by 2nd Defendant. It is my view that in the absence of a formal contract, and having read Exhibit WAA6, the presence of the 2nd Defendant is relevant for the final and complete determination of the matters in dispute. The Application is refused. No award as to c