TIESO GHANA LIMITED vs. EUROGET DE-INVESTA SA [2019]DLSC6584

Date	2019-07-24
Suit No.	CIVIL APPEAL NO. J4/34/2019
Citation No.	[2019]DLSC6584

ANSAH JSC (PRESIDING)

DOTSE JSC

YEBOAH JSC

MARFUL-SAU JSC

KOTEY JSC

ANKAMAH MENSAH FOR THE PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT/APPELLANT

YAW ESHUN WITH AMERLEY ADJOTEYE FOR THE DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT

[2019]DLSC6584
																																						<div class="restriction-wrapper">
														<div class="container-lg">
															<div class="row">
																<div class="col-md-12 restricted-content">
																	<div class="restricted-content-img-wrapper">
																		<div class="lock-icon bounce-7">
																			<img class=""
																				src="https://dennislawgh.com/dl-assets/dl-images/lock-content.png"
																				alt="Subscription based content">
																		</div>
																	</div>
																	 
																		<a href="https://dennislawgh.com/login"
																		class="btn btn-primary btn-lg"
																		style="font-family: 'open sans'; text-transform: capitalize; border-radius: 8px"> 
																		Login to Read Full Case </a>
																	 
																	
																</div>
															</div>
														</div>
													</div>
													<main id="main" class="content" style="min-height: 60rem" >TIESO
GHANA LIMITED<o:p></o:p>(PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT/APPELLANT)<o:p></o:p>vs.<o:p></o:p>EUROGET
DE-INVESTA SA<o:p></o:p>(DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT)<o:p></o:p>[SUPREME COURT, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:center;line-height:115%;border:none;mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">CIVIL
APPEAL NO. J4/34/2019&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;DATE: 24TH JULY,
2019<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>ANKAMAH MENSAH FOR THE
PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT/APPELLANT.<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

YAW ESHUN WITH AMERLEY ADJOTEYE FOR THE
DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT.<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>ANSAH JSC (PRESIDING), DOTSE JSC, YEBOAH JSC,
MARFUL-SAU JSC, KOTEY JSC<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border-top:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
border-left:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;border-right:none;
padding:1.0pt 0in 1.0pt 0in">

<p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:center;line-height:115%;border:none;mso-border-top-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
mso-border-bottom-alt:solid windowtext 1.5pt;padding:0in;mso-padding-alt:1.0pt 0in 1.0pt 0in">JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p>

</div>KOTEY, JSC:-<o:p></o:p>Before us is an appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal affirming
a decision on the trial High Court dismissing an application by the Plaintiff/
Appellant/Appellant (hereinafter Plaintiff) for leave to enter final judgment
under Order 64, Rule 13 of C.I. 47.<s><o:p></o:p></s><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The Plaintiff was a subcontractor of the Defendant/Respondent/Respondent
(hereinafter Defendant) for the construction of a 160-bed regional hospital at
Wa in the Upper West region. Their contract was governed by “Federation
Internationale Des Ingenieurs-Conseils”, International Federation of Consulting
Engineers Rules (hereinafter referred to as FIDIC Rules) which contain dispute
resolution provisions. <o:p></o:p>For ease of reference we reproduce the dispute resolution provisions of
the FIDIC Rules.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>“20.1
Contractor’s Claim<o:p></o:p>If the Contractor
considers himself to be entitled to any extension of the Time for Completion
and/or any additional payment, under any Clause of these Conditions or
otherwise in connection with the Contract, the Contractor shall give notice to
the Employer, describing the event or circumstance giving rise to the claim.
The notice shall be given as soon as practicable, and not later than 28 days
after the Contractor became aware, or should have become aware, of the event or
circumstance.<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p>20.2 Appointment
of the Dispute Adjudication Board<o:p></o:p>In cases of
disagreements between the parties: They shall attempt to resolve their
disagreement through friendly, direct dialogue and negotiations. Failure to do
that at the end of 30 days from the date when the disagreement arose, either
party shall give notice to each other of its wish to resort to a DAB and
disagreement shall formally become dispute. Disputes shall be adjudicated by a
DAB in accordance with Sub-Clause 20.4 [Obtaining Dispute Adjudication Board’s
Decision]. The parties shall jointly appoint a DAB by the date 28 days after a
Party gives notice to the other Party of its intention to refer a dispute to a
DAB in accordance with Sub-Clause 20.4.<o:p></o:p>The DAB shall
comprise, as stated in the Particular Conditions, either one or three suitably
qualified persons (“the members”) If the number is not so stated and the
Parties do not agree otherwise, the DAB shall comprise three persons…<o:p></o:p>