GREENLINE LOGISTICS LIMITED VS AEL MINING SERVICES (GHANA) LIMITED
July 6, 2018
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- HER LADYSHIP JUSTICE JANAPARE A. BARTELS-KODWO (MRS.)
Areas of Law
- Alternative dispute resolution
- Civil Procedure
- Contract Law
July 6, 2018
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
In this Ghana High Court application, the Applicant sought to re-list a civil suit that had previously been struck out on 17 November 2015 and referred to the Ghana Arbitration Centre (GAC) under Clause 25 of the parties’ contract. The Applicant described administrative delays at GAC, adjourned Arbitration Management Meetings, and fee demands—USD 20,000 upfront, USD 15,000 before publication of the award, and GHS 10,000 for administrative/secretarial expenses—as impediments to proceeding. The Respondent opposed, highlighting appointment of a sole arbitrator, settlement attempts, and Section 22 of the Alternative Dispute Resolution Act, 2010 (Act 798), which sets the framework for arbitrator fees and review. Justice Janapare A. Bartels‑Kodwo held that court jurisdiction is not ousted but statutory procedures must be followed: fee disputes must first be reviewed by the appointing authority (GAC) and any court application must be on notice to both the other party and the arbitrator. The court rejected the Applicant’s unsupported claim of financial hardship (citing Majolagbe v Larbi) and, guided by Republic vrs High Court ex parte Asakun Engineering Construction Ltd, refused to compel litigation, dismissing the application as premature with no order as to costs.
APPLICANT’S CASE
The Plaintiff/Applicant has brought the instant application on the 11th of December 2017 to re-list the suit which had been referred to the Ghana Arbitration Centre.
The case of the Applicant is that, following the order of the court given on 17th November 2015, (Exhibit EN) the suit was struck out for the parties to submit to arbitration as earlier ordered and for same to be relisted if need be(EXHIBIT EN1). The Applicant avers that, every step to kick start the arbitration was bedeviled with administrative lapses by the Ghana Arbitration Centre and undue delay by the Respondent causing the Applicant to apply to re-list the matter for same to be heard by the court but same was declined (EXHIBIT EN2). The Applicant in obeying the courts order restarted the arbitration proceedings by a letter they wrote to the Ghana Arbitration Centre.
The Applicant states that, it took nearly two months for the Ghana Arbitration Centre to acknowledge the letter and to act on it.
Following a series of letters written to the Ghana Arbitration Centre, a sole arbitrator was appointed which the Applicants acknowledged by its letter of 6th June, 2017. A date was scheduled for the Arbitration Management Meeting which was adjourned on two occasions.
The Ghana Arbitration Centre later wrote to the parties fixing a date for the Arbitration Management Meeting and demanding as conditions precedent that, the Applicant pays Twenty Thousand Dollars (USD$20, 000. 00) on or before 30th November 2017 and Fifteen Thousand Dollars (USD $15, 000. 00) before publication of the award, plus Ten Thousand Ghana Cedis (GH¢10, 000. 00) as Administrative and Secretarial expenses. (Exhibit EN13)The Applicant therefore states that these conditions made it impossible for the arbitration proceeding to take place as the Applicant does not have the ability to meet the financial burden imposed on them and the said prerequisites constitutes an impediment to the arbitration process, which has been communicated to the Arbitration Center.
To buttress this argument, Applicant stresses that Alternative Dispute Resolution mechanism is designed principally to save time and costs and to remove the bitterness, inconvenience and frustration that accompany litigation.
The Applicant states that the financial difficulties of the Applicant should not constitute any hindrance as that will amount to denying it access to justice.
The sum of Applicant’s case is that the continuous undue delay, procedur