M/S WILLYJADE LIMITED VRS THE ATTORNEY GENERAL (C2/023/2023) [2024] GHAHC 223 (12 June 2024)

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF JUDICATURE, IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE SITTING AT SUNYANI ON THE 12TH DAY OF JUNE 2024 BEFORE HIS LORDSHIP JUSTICE GABRIEL NENE KWAO MATE TEYE (J) ========================================================== SUIT NO. C2/023/2023 M/S WILLYJADE LIMITED PLAINTIFF VRS THE ATTORNEY GENERAL DEFENDANT J U D G M E N T The plaintiff on 23/11/2022 filed through his counsel, Prince Obediaba Esq., against the defendant claiming the following reliefs; (a) Recovery of total amount of GH¢2,430,969.37 being the outstanding amounts under the payment certificates endorsed on the writ of summons (b) Interest on the above sum of monies stated in reliefs (a) (i), (a) (ii), (a) (iii), (a)(iv), (a)(v), (a)(viii) from the date of final payment on the prevailing commercial bank rate. 1 (c) 10% cost including legal fees. The following issues were set down for the trial in this matter; (a) Whether or not the contracts mentioned in the statement of claim were awarded by the Government of Ghana (GoG) through the Ghana Highways Authority to the plaintiff. (b) Whether or not the plaintiff is entitled to be paid the amounts endorsed on the writ. (c) Whether or not the plaintiff gave a notice of intention to commence legal action to the defendant for thirty (30) days. The plaintiff in establishing its case called one witness and tendered the following Exhibits; award letter or letters of acceptance of the various contracts, payment certificates raised in favour of the plaintiff by the Ghana Highways Authority statement of Bills from the Ghana Road Fund secretariat. The above-mentioned Exhibits were admitted into evidence by the Court and same were marked as Exhibits ‘A’, ‘B’, ‘C’ and ‘D’ respectively and no objections were raised by counsel for the Defendant. 2 When a document such as in the instant case is offered or tendered and it is not objected to, the said document would form part of the court’s record and the trial judge would be entitled to consider it in evaluating the evidence on record for what it is worth. That it was the view taken in the case of ARYEH AND KPAKPO VRS AYAA IDDRISU (2010)SC GLR 39 and AMOA VRS ARTHUR(1987) 2 GLR 87 CA; “If a party looked on and allowed the inadmissible evidence to pass without objecting, it would form part of the court’s record and the trial judge would be entitled to consider it in evaluating the evidence on record for what it’s worth” The defendant on the 14th day of February, 2024 called its witness, One Engineer Harold Atobrah who is the Acting Director of the Ghana Highways Authority in the Bono Region. Under cross-examination, the plaintiff (Counsel) asked the witness the following questions; Q: When did you award the contracts to the plaintiff? A: 2017 and 2020. 3 Q: And you prepared payment certificate for the plaintiff, is that correct? A: Yes Q: So you will agree with me that the payment certificates in this court are valid? Q; You will also agree with me that the time for payment to the plaintiff has been long overdue. A: Yes, per the condition of the contract, the employer is supposed to pay within 90 days and the time limit has elapsed Q; You will agree with me that the plaintiff is entitled to be paid by the Ghana Road Fund Secretariat A: Yes, because per the condition of contract the employer is mandated to pay the plaintiff. Q: Is that your case that all the award of letters, payment certificates which are before the court are all valid? A; The payment certificates that are examined, they are valid in that they were all signed by the authorized person(s). 4 The law is that where the evidence of an opponent corroborates the evidence of the opposite party and the opponent’s case remains uncorroborated, the court is enjoined to accept the corroborated evidence unless there is compelling reasons to the contrary. This was the case of CHOU SEN VRS TONADO ENTERPRISES LTD. (2007- 2008) 1 SC GLR at 140 per Brobbey JSC, it was held thus; “One point that devasted the case of the defendant was evidence given by their own witness, the second defendant witness. His testimony was clearly against them to the extent that he even described the acquisition of the third plot to them as an error. Rather, his testimony supported the case of the plaintiff. The law on this issue is settled and it is this; When the evidence of a party remains uncorroborated but that of his opponent is corroborated even by the witness of his opponent, the court ought to accept the uncorroborated one. The only exception to the rule is where the court has or finds reason to reject the corroborated evidence” This court on the 22nd day of May, 2024, was about to deliver its judgment when Counsel for the Defendant, Ama Yamoaba Amoah Esq. told or indicated to the court that some amounts of monies have been paid by the Defendant to the plaintiff and 5 which the plaintiff’s counsel confirmed same. Upon that confirmation, the court ordered the plaintiff’s counsel to amend the writ of summons to reflect amounts paid to the plaintiff. On the 27th day of May, 2024, the plaintiff’s counsel filed in this court the amended writ of summons and same was served on the defendant. That the plaintiff further produced and filed the bank statement from the Fidelity Bank in which the various payments were made into. On the amended writ of summons, a total amount of GH¢1,042,290.75 has been paid to the plaintiff out of GH¢2,430,696.37 remaining GH¢1,392.272.04 to be paid to the plaintiff. The defendant has paid a(i), a(ii),a (iii), a(iv), a(v) remaining reliefs a(vi) a(vii) and a(viii) to be paid to the plaintiff by the defendant. That the defendant by paying some of the reliefs sought by the plaintiff clearly or expressly concludes that the defendant is indebted to the plaintiff. Consequently, this court; 1. Enters judgment in favour of the plaintiff against the defendant in respect of the remaining amount of GH¢1,392.272.04 6 2. Interest is to be calculated on the reliefs a(i), a(ii), a(iii),a(iv) and a(v) which are the amounts paid to the plaintiff from the dates on the payment certificates to the dates that the plaintiff received payments from the defendant. 3. Interests is also to be calculated on the unpaid reliefs which are reliefs a(vi), a(vii)and a(viii) from the dates on the payment certificates to the final payment at the prevailing commercial bank rate. Cost of GH¢85,000.00 is also awarded to the plaintiff against the defendant GABRIEL MATE-TEYE (JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT) Counsel: Prince Obidiaba Esq., for the plaintiff. Counsel: Ama Yamoaba Amoah Esq, for the defendant 7