OTENG – AMPOFO VRS. GYAU AND ANOTHER (C2/29/2018) [2024] GHAHC 180 (15 March 2024)

OTENG – AMPOFO VRS. GYAU AND ANOTHER (C2/29/2018) [2024] GHAHC 180 (15 March 2024)

Plaintiff proved on a balance of probabilities that he completed 85% of the warehouse project, the agreed contract sum was GH¢480,000.00, and only GH¢51,000.00 was paid. Defendants failed to prove full payment or overpayment, or that Plaintiff’s work was defective to justify termination or counterclaim. Plaintiff is entitled to the outstanding sum, interest, general damages, and costs. Defendants’ counterclaim is dismissed.

Citation
OTENG – AMPOFO VRS. GYAU AND ANOTHER (C2/29/2018) [2024] GHAHC 180 (15 March 2024)
Parties
Plaintiff: Johnson Oteng-Ampofo; 1st Defendant: Kofi Gyau; 2nd Defendant: OP Properties Limited
Court
ghahc
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
15 March 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil / Final Judgment After Full Trial
Outcome
Judgment for Plaintiff; Defendants’ counterclaim dismissed.
Legal Topics
Building and Construction Contracts, Quantum Meruit, Termination of Contract, Counterclaim, Burden of Proof
Source Language
eng
Contract Law Civil Procedure Building and Construction Contracts Quantum Meruit Termination of Contract Counterclaim Burden of Proof

Case Brief

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 4 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Johnson Oteng-Ampofo

Plaintiff

Kofi Gyau

1st Defendant

OP Properties Limited

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Final Judgment After Full Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Plaintiff completed 85% of the warehouse project and is entitled to payment for works done
  2. 2 Whether the Defendants are indebted to the Plaintiff for the outstanding contract sum
  3. 3 Whether the 1st Defendant is personally liable together with the 2nd Defendant

Ratio Decidendi

Plaintiff proved on a balance of probabilities that he completed 85% of the warehouse project, the agreed contract sum was GH¢480,000.00, and only GH¢51,000.00 was paid. Defendants failed to prove full payment or overpayment, or that Plaintiff’s work was defective to justify termination or counterclaim. Plaintiff is entitled to the outstanding sum, interest, general damages, and costs. Defendants’ counterclaim is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Judgment for Plaintiff; Defendants’ counterclaim dismissed.

Orders

  • Defendants to pay Plaintiff GH¢357,000.00 for works done.
  • Interest on GH¢357,000.00 from 2018 until final payment.