GREAT CAPE COMPANY LTD VS ATTORNEY-GENERAL & MINISTER FOR JUSTICE

Plaintiff, a company registered under the laws of Switzerland and acting through its lawful attorney, Dr. Nat Tanoh on the 15/05/15 issued a writ out of the Registry of the court seeking the following reliefs: a. A declaration that following from the admission of liability by the Attorney General for and behalf of the Government of Ghana on 18th April, 2001 and again on the 8th July, 2014, the Plaintiff is entitled to an amount of US$1, 117, 818. 45 (One Million, One Hundred and Seventeen Thousand, Eight Hundred and Eighteen US Dollars and Forty Five Cents) as damages for breach of contract and also pursuant to S. 18(1) of the Limitations Act, 1972 (NRCD 54). b. A further declaration that the defendants are estopped from in anyway denying the liability of the Government of Ghana in the terms as set out in relief (a) above.

c. Interest on (a) until date of final payment.

d. Costs and such further order(s) as the honourable court may deem fit.

PLAINTIFF’S CASE Plaintiff provides the basis of his claim to the reliefs he seeks in a twenty three paragraph statement of claim that accompanied the issuance of the writ.

Plaintiff avers that it entered into a contract dated 9th May 1978 with the Ghana National Procurement Agency (GNPA) for the supply of 200, 000 tonnes of cement clinker to GNPA.

And that under the SMC II Government, GNPA wrongly abrogated the contract on the 23rd November 1978 after rejecting a third shipment from the Plaintiff.

Plaintiff further states that in 1981 a Committee of Enquiry appointed by the Government of Ghana established the liability of GNPA and that after negotiation between the parties the Plaintiff agreed to accept $400, 000. 00 in full and final settlement of the GNPA’s indebtedness to the Plaintiff on condition that payment will be made promptly.

It is Plaintiff’s case that the 2nd Defendant failed to make the payments as agreed, and that in 1987 the Solicitor General acting for the 1st Defendant agreed that an interest of 8. 5% per annum compound interest would accrue on the amount of $400, 000. 00. Plaintiff then proceeds to states that in 1998, the then Minister of Finance acting on the advice of the then Attorney General paid the amount of $927, 000. 00 to the Plaintiff.

In February 2001 the Plaintiff petitioned the 1st Defendant for payment to it of a balance of the amount due on the ground that there had been a miscalculation of the amounts of interests that had accrued on the debt at the time the 2nd Defendant ma