INTERNATIONAL ROM LIMITED v. VODAFONE LIMITED & ORS
2015
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- KUSI-APPIAH, (PRESIDING)
- KORBIEH, J.A.
- WELBOURNE (MRS.), J.A
Areas of Law
- Contract Law
- Evidence Law
- Commercial Law
- Civil Procedure
2015
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
This appeal concerns a dispute between Ghanaian International Rom Ltd. and Ghana Telecom regarding multiple contracts for network expansion. Accusations were made about contract breaches, non-payment, wrongful termination, and whether separate legal entities (Mauritian and Ghanaian International Rom Ltd.) could be treated as one. The High Court initially favored the plaintiff, awarding significant sums and damages. The appeal focused on evaluating the probative value of an email about the liquidation of Mauritian International Rom Ltd., and questioning the awards. This court found no grounds to overturn the High Court's decisions, upholding its judgment entirely.
JUDGMENT
KUSI-APPIAH, J.A:
This is an appeal against the decision of the High Court (Commercial Division), Accra dated 15th May, 2013 in favour of the plaintiff/ respondent against the 1st defendant/appellant. I will refer to the parties in the manner they appeared at the court below.
The case of the plaintiff as gathered from its pleadings and evidence at the trial was that, it entered into a number of contracts with the 1st defendant, the first, dated 17th December, 2003 (Exhibit A) as amended by a Supplementary Frame Contract dated 26th January, 2005 (Exhibit B) for the supply, delivery, installation, testing, commissioning, maintenance and support services for 1st defendant’s expansion network.
According to the plaintiff, it subsequently executed another contract with the 1st defendant, dated 13th May, 2008 (Exhibit C) and 2nd October, 2008 (Exhibit D) in respect of the 1st defendant’s expansion of its network aforesaid.
The plaintiff contended that although it faithfully and diligently executed the works contained in the respective contracts, the 1st defendant failed to make available the required funds to enable the plaintiff to undertake the assignment. Consequently, the plaintiff was compelled to borrow from financial institutions at costs with high interest rates to its detriment to complete the assignments stipulated under the contracts – Exhibits A, B, C and D.
It is the case of the plaintiff that upon completion of the civil works, the 1st defendant took over possession of the works for its operations and services. However, the 1st defendant failed to heed to the several reminders by the plaintiff to comply with the terms of the contract for its outstanding payments.
The plaintiff testified that while demanding its outstanding payment from the 1st defendant, the 1st defendant by a letter dated 8th May, 2009 wrongfully terminated the contract between the plaintiff and 1st defendant.
On 19th August, 2009, the plaintiff by its writ of summons, therefore brought an action against the 1st defendant for the following reliefs:
“i. Plaintiff claims from the defendant a total outstanding of US$4,893,057.08 being unpaid bills by the defendant on due dates arising from works executed by plaintiff as contained in the contracts of 17th December, 2003 with the amendments and 13th May, 2008 respectively for works executed and taken over by the defendant but has refused to settle.
ii. an order for accounts or reconciliation of accounts between the tw