ESSIAM VRS FEMME ARCH CONSULT & ANOTHER (H1/200/2018) [2021] GHACA 51 (28 October 2021)

ESSIAM VRS FEMME ARCH CONSULT & ANOTHER (H1/200/2018) [2021] GHACA 51 (28 October 2021)

The termination of the plaintiff's services was wrongful because it was effected without the required approval of the client as stipulated in the consortium agreement. The agreed percentage for the plaintiff's fees was 3.15%, as established by documentary evidence and the failure of the defendants to rebut this with credible evidence. The plaintiff substantially discharged his contractual obligations and is entitled to the awarded fees and damages, subject to sharing the final tranche with the replacement engineer.

Citation
[2021] GHACA 51
Parties
Plaintiff/respondent: Sampson Essiam; Defendant/appellant: Femme Arch Consult; Defendant/appellant: Managing Director of Femme Arch Consult
Court
Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
28 October 2021
Case Number
H1/200/2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with modification
Legal Topics
Wrongful Termination, Consortium Agreements, Distribution of Professional Fees, Burden of Proof, Interpretation of Contracts, Award of Interest, Damages
Source Language
English
Contract Law Employment Law Civil Procedure Wrongful Termination Consortium Agreements Distribution of Professional Fees Burden of Proof Interpretation of Contracts +2 more

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 25 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sampson Essiam

Plaintiff/respondent

Femme Arch Consult

Defendant/appellant

Managing Director of Femme Arch Consult

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the termination of the plaintiff's services was wrongful under the consortium agreement
  2. 2 Whether the agreed percentage for distribution of fees to the plaintiff was 3.15% or 2.75%
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff discharged his obligations under the contract and is entitled to fees

Ratio Decidendi

The termination of the plaintiff's services was wrongful because it was effected without the required approval of the client as stipulated in the consortium agreement. The agreed percentage for the plaintiff's fees was 3.15%, as established by documentary evidence and the failure of the defendants to rebut this with credible evidence. The plaintiff substantially discharged his contractual obligations and is entitled to the awarded fees and damages, subject to sharing the final tranche with the replacement engineer.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with modification

Orders

  • Judgment of the trial court affirmed except that the new structural engineer is entitled to 50% share of the last tranche of payments as per exhibits F and G.
  • Plaintiff entitled to consultancy fees at 3.15% rate, general damages, interest at current bank rate, and costs as awarded by the trial court.