2024
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The plaintiff originally filed for recovery of sums and interest due to additional unapproved works, which the defendant denied. The trial court dismissed the case on procedural flaws. The court of appeal reversed the dismissal on procedural grounds, deciding that process irregularities in the writ of summons didn't nullify the claim but found no further substantial grounds for the additional sums and retention claims. Awarding interest was sustained for the admitted amounts.
Ackaah Boafo, JA
i. Overview:
[1] My Lords, I wish to preface this judgment with the statement by the former President of the Supreme Court of Israel, Aharon Barak which is that;
' Every meaning that an interpreter gives a legal text must have an Archimedean foothold in the language of the text. True, the interpreter is not a linguist. But linguistics sets the boundaries of legal interpretation. An interpreter may not give a text a meaning that a linguist could not give it. Justice Frankfurter said as much, noting that 'while courts are no longer confined to the language, they are still
confined by it ' 1 .
I shall later speak to the quote above in considering the merits or otherwise of this appeal.
[2] This is an appeal arising from a case the Plaintiff/Appellant (the Plaintiff) filed in the High Court, Commercial Division, Cape Coast on December 2, 2020 and claimed for recovery of a total amount of GH ₵ 75,463.81, award of interest, cost, and damages. The trial court after a fullblown trial struck out the suit on procedural grounds. My Lords, the matter has now come to this court as an appeal from the dismissal of the action by the High Court. The primary question for resolution on this appeal is whether the learned trial judge erred in dismissing the suit and as contended by the Appellant, whether the judgment is against the weight of evidence.
[3] Dissatisfied with the judgment dated and delivered on 2nd December, 2021, the Plaintiff/Appellant has launched this appeal and the relief sought from this court is an order to set aside the judgment of the trial judge. In this judgment, the designation of the parties as Plaintiff and Defendant shall be maintained and where appropriate referred to as Appellant and Respondent. Before dealing with the arguments advanced in support and against the appeal, I will give a brief background of the case.
ii. Background :
[4] The Appellant averred that sometime in ' December 2017 it won a contract for Supply and Installation of ICT Equipment and Renovation of Computer Laboratory for the College of Distance Education (CODE) at a contract price of GH ₵ 241, 370.20'. The Appellant further averred that upon moving to the site, a meeting was held with officers of the Defendant University who directed it to undertake additional works which then
1 In his book 'Purposive Interpretation in Law' (P.U.P., U.S.A, 2005 ) at page 19.
changed the contract price. The Appellant listed the additional works it had to un