Environmental Development Group Ltd Vrs Provident Insurance Company Ltd and Others [2020] GHASC 12 (18 March 2020)

Environmental Development Group Ltd Vrs Provident Insurance Company Ltd and Others [2020] GHASC 12 (18 March 2020)

The 3rd defendant's failure to grant a reasonable extension of time under Clause 19 constituted a fundamental breach, discharging the plaintiff from further obligations. The plaintiff was entitled to general damages for this breach but failed to strictly prove special damages or quantum meruit. The 1st defendant was...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
Environmental Development Group Ltd Vrs Provident Insurance Company Ltd and Others [2020] GHASC 12 (18 March 2020)
Parties
Plaintiff/respondent/respondent: Environmental Development Group Limited; 1st Defendant/respondent/respondent: Provident Insurance Co. Ltd.; 2nd Defendant: Attorney General; 3rd Defendant/appellant/appellant: Ghana Education Trust Fund
Court
ghasc
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
18 March 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Appellate (supreme Court)
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part and dismissed in part. Judgments of High Court and Court of Appeal set aside.
Legal Topics
Breach of Contract, Extension of Time, Liquidated Damages, Quantum Meruit, Repudiation, Special Damages, Performance Bonds, Counterclaim, Frustration
Source Language
en
Contract Law Construction Law Breach of Contract Extension of Time Liquidated Damages Quantum Meruit Repudiation Special Damages +3 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Environmental Development Group Limited

Plaintiff/respondent/respondent

Provident Insurance Co. Ltd.

1st Defendant/respondent/respondent

Attorney General

2nd Defendant

Ghana Education Trust Fund

3rd Defendant/appellant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Appellate (supreme Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the termination of the contract by the 3rd defendant was lawful
  2. 2 Whether the failure to extend time constituted a fundamental breach
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff was entitled to special damages and/or quantum meruit

Ratio Decidendi

The 3rd defendant's failure to grant a reasonable extension of time under Clause 19 constituted a fundamental breach, discharging the plaintiff from further obligations. The plaintiff was entitled to general damages for this breach but failed to strictly prove special damages or quantum meruit. The 1st defendant was not liable on the guarantee bonds as the conditions for liability were not met. The 3rd defendant's counterclaim failed as it repudiated the contract and could not seek remedies under it.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part and dismissed in part. Judgments of High Court and Court of Appeal set aside.

Orders

  • Counterclaim of 3rd defendant dismissed.
  • Plaintiff's relief (a) granted: 1st defendant perpetually restrained from paying on guarantee bonds.