PATRICIA ABBAN PADDI & ors vs EZZEDINE TRUST COMPANY LTD. & ANOR
2024
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- HER LADYSHIP JUSTICE SHEILA MINTA
Areas of Law
- Alternative dispute resolution
- Contract Law
- Civil Procedure
- Property and Real Estate Law
2024
HIGH COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
Beneficiaries of the late Godfrey Abban’s estate entered a joint venture structured as a 45-year sub-lease with the 1st Defendant to redevelop House No. 39, Airport Residential Area, Accra. The agreement required a US$220,000 upfront payment, completion of apartments within 24 months, and delivery of six units to the Plaintiffs, and provided for US$6,000 per month for delay; notably, it contained no termination clause. The Lands Commission (2nd Defendant) was joined nominally for rectification. Despite Defendants’ non-participation and an earlier interlocutory default judgment, the Court, after hearing Plaintiffs’ witness Joel Gregory Abban and reviewing exhibits, identified the contract’s escalatory ADR clause mandating mediation then arbitration. Applying Section 7(5) of Act 798 and Section 195 of Act 1036, and noting the requirement to prove damages under Order 11 rule 13(4), the Court refused final judgment, set aside the interlocutory judgment, and referred the matter to Clause 9 procedures and Court-Connected ADR, citing authority to vary orders when mandatory provisions are overlooked.
SUMMARY OF CASE
The Plaintiffs are the beneficiaries of the Estate of the late Godfrey Abban who devised the property subject matter of this dispute to Plaintiffs.
Plaintiffs entered into a Joint Venture Agreement with 1st Defendant for the development of Plaintiffs’ property House No. 39, Airport Residential Area, Accra.
Plaintiffs executed a sub-lease agreement dated 20th December, 2013 with the 1st Defendant which said agreement was stamped and recorded by the Lands Commission and Numbered AR 873/2014 and stamped as LVD 4420/2014 by the 1st Defendant.
Per the terms of the agreement between the parties the 1st Defendant was to make an upfront payment of US$220, 000, develop the said property into apartments and hand over six (6) units within twenty-four (24) months from the execution of the agreement.
According to the Plaintiffs the parties further agreed that in the event that the apartments were not completed within the agreed period, the 1st Defendant was to pay US$6, 000. 00 per month to the Plaintiffs.
They had no Termination Clause.
According to the Plaintiffs, after the execution of the sub-lease the 1st Defendant has had its interest registered at Lands Commission but has till date failed to honour the other covenants of the agreement entered into by the parties which caused the Plaintiffs to issue a Writ against the Defendants on 11th June, 2019. The 2nd Defendant an agency responsible for registration of lands have been joined as a nominal party for the purposes of rectification of its records.
The basis of this action is the alleged violation of the contract between the Plaintiffs and the 1st Defendant.
The Plaintiffs claimed the following: -1. Termination of the contract between the Plaintiffs and the 1st Defendant.
2. An order by this Honourable Court requiring the 1st Defendant to pay the outstanding penalty for not completing the project within Twenty-Four (24)months.
3. An order for the rectification of the register at the Lands Commission.
4. General damages.
5. Legal Cost. 6. Any other remedy as the Court may deem fit.
There is evidence on the record that the said Writ has been served on both Defendants.
The 2nd Defendant entered appearance on 28th June, 2019 but failed to file any other process or participate in further proceedings before the Court.
The 1st Defendant did not file any process at all, not even Entry of Appearance after service of processes by substitution.
In an application for judgment in default of