WEBB BUILDERS LIMITED v. TOLON – KUMBUNGU DISTRICT ASSEMBLY & ANOTHER
2016
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
- ADJEI, JA – PRESIDING
- LOVELACE-JOHNSON, JA
- ACKAH-YENSU, JA
Areas of Law
- Contract Law
- Civil Procedure
2016
COURT OF APPEAL
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The case involves an appeal by the 1st Defendant against a ruling by the High Court Tamale, which refused to set aside a judgment obtained by the Plaintiff for payment of works executed on roads. The High Court initially ruled in favor of the Plaintiff based on an admission by the 1st Defendant, but the Defendant later argued that the case was procedurally incompetent due to the Plaintiff's failure to comply with the statutory notice requirements under Section 127 of the Local Government Act. The Appeal Court agreed with the 1st Defendant, declaring the Plaintiff's action incompetent and setting aside the High Court's judgment. The court also clarified that the Attorney-General was not a necessary party in the suit against the District Assembly.
ADJEI, J.A:
The 1st Defendant/Appellant dissatisfied with the ruling delivered by the High Court Tamale which refused to set aside the judgment on admission obtained against it by the plaintiff on 11th November, 2011 appealed to this Court to reverse the decision of the High Court. For the purposes of this appeal, the parties would maintain their designations used at the trial Court. The Plaintiff/Respondent would be referred to as the Plaintiff and the 1st Defendant/Appellant as 1st Defendant.
The Plaintiff instituted the action which culmunated in this appeal at the High Court Tamale claiming against the Defendants, inter alia the sum of GH₵40,334.00 and the interest thereon being an amount certified for payment by payment certificate No.1 dated 28th June, 2008 for works executed on reshaping of Cheshegu-Nyankpala and another 22.85 Km Feeder Road which were executed by the Plaintiff. Apart from the interest payable at the current bank rate from 28th June, 2008 to the date of Judgment claimed by Plaintiff, it further claimed for damages for breach of contract. The Plaintiff in its Statement of Claim averred that all demands made by it on the 1st Defendant to pay for the work done by the Plaintiff were refused. The Plaintiff then on 29th August, 2011 through its lawyer served a demand notice on the 1st Defendant. The Plaintiff therefore instituted the action against the Defendants after the 1st Defendant had evinced its intention clear not pay its indebtedness to the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff in paragraph 3 of its statement of claim averred that it sued the Attorney-General as a 2nd Defendant by virtue of the fact that she is the Chief Legal Advisor of the Republic of Ghana and by article 88 of the Constitution of Ghana, 1992, all Civil proceedings against the state are to be instituted against the Attorney-General as Defendant and its legal effect would be discussed in the course of this appeal.
The Statement of defence filed on behalf of the Defendants by the Attorney-General’s representation in Tamale admitted the Plaintiff’s claim but added that the payment of the debt was dependent on receipt of its share of the Common Fund from the Common Fund Administrator.
As a result of the admissions made by the 1st Defendant in its statement of defence, the Plaintiff filed an application for judgment on admission under Order 23 rule 6 of the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules C.I. 47.
On 11th November, 2011, the High Court entered final judgment for the Plai