2022
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
Ghana Telecommunication Co. Ltd and Internet Ghana Limited litigated two consolidated suits arising from a 2002 collaboration to provide retail internet services using DSL technology. Ghana Telecom supplied infrastructure, then launched its own BB4U retail product, allegedly engaging in free installations and customer poaching, leading Internet Ghana to claim anti-competitive and unfair trade practices. Ghana Telecom sued for unpaid service fees; Internet Ghana counterclaimed for damages and separately sought declarations of breach, anti-competitive conduct, and damages. The High Court largely rejected Ghana Telecoms recovery claim, dismissed Internet Ghanas special damages but awarded substantial general damages, granted declarations, and rejected Ghana Telecoms defamation counterclaim. On appeal, Adjei, J.A., writing for the Court of Appeal with Bartels-Kodwo, J.A., and Baffour, J.A. agreeing, dismissed all ten grounds, held the debt owed limited to $28,607.38 per consent judgment and no additional interest in this appeal, affirmed breach of the collaboration agreement and the multiple general damages as properly distinct, clarified that common law (not Act 589) governed the unfair competition findings, set aside Internet Ghanas out-of-time Notice of Variation, and affirmed the High Courts judgment.
ADJEI, J.A:
The cases before us on appeal are consolidated suits filed by the respective parties. The
first suit was filed by Ghana Telecommunication Co. Ltd. against Internet Ghana
Limited as suit number AC No. 49/2007. The second suit was filed by Internet Ghana
Limited against Ghana Telecommunication Ltd barely five years after the institution of
the first suit. The second suit was registered as RPC/481/2012. The High Court, in its
judgment delivered on 9th January, 2020 largely dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim in the
first suit and dismissed its counterclaim in the second suit. The trial High Court granted
substantially the reliefs sought by the Plaintiff in the second suit. The Plaintiff in the first
suit, who was also the Defendant in the second suit, was dissatisfied with the judgment
delivered by the trial High Court filed an appeal against the decisions in both cases. For
the purposes of this appeal, the Plaintiff/Respondent would be described as the
Appellant. The Defendant in the first suit, who was also the Plaintiff in the second suit,
also filed a notice of variation in respect of the second suit to increase the amount
awarded in its favour as general damages and would also be described as Respondent.
The brief facts of the case, as could be gleaned from the pleadings filed and the
judgment, were that the Appellant sued the Respondent to recover an amount of
¢9,168,249,654.00 cedis (GH¢916,824.96) being outstanding in respect of services the
Appellant rendered to the Respondent and the interest therein from 31st December,
2006, to the date of final payment. The Appellant entered into an agreement with the
Respondent on 12th November, 2002 to support the Respondent which is a registered
company in Ghana to engage in the business of provision of internet to support it to
provide multimedia internet services to its subscribers. The services the Appellant
rendered to support the Respondent to perform its mandate included Co-location
services, EL services, Operator Access services, Leasehold services, and Leased Lines
services. According to the Appellant, it provided the services mentioned above on
credit to the Respondent, and the aggregate of the outstanding amount is the sum
endorsed on its writ of summons. The Respondent, in its statement of defence and
counterclaim, stated that at the time it engaged the services of the Appellant to support
it in providing internet services, the Appellant was not in the business of