The commercial division of the High Court Presided by the learned Justice John-Mark Nuku Alifo J. has set aside a final arbitral award delivered by the Ghana Arbitration Centre in favour of Ashanti Port Services against Justmoh Construction Limited.

The Ghana Arbitration Centre per its award dated 10th December, 2025 ordered Justmoh Construction Limited to pay in excess of US$33,300,000 to Ashanti Port Services for breaches to a contract between the parties in the development of the Boankra Integrated Logistics Terminal (BILT) Project.

The Court in an immaculate delivery in the case reported as JUSTMOH CONSTRUCTION LTD v. ASHANTI PORT SERVICES LTD [TLP-HC-2026-12], upheld the brilliant submissions of the Professor of Law, the revered Prof. Kwame Gyan on the incapacity of Ashanti Port Services to commence arbitration proceedings against the Applicant-construction company. It also upheld the view of the inimitable Professor on breaches to dispute resolution mechanisms of the parties in their contract for construction works for the Boankra Integrated Logistics Terminal (BILT) Project.

STAR OF THE MONTH - Professor Philip Ebow Bondzi-Simpson ESQ.

Yudah Brown, Influential Law Content Creator, Declares SRC Presidential Bid

In his elegantly presented decision, the learned presiding Judge of the Commercial Court rejected the claims and arguments of the Respondent through their lawyer, the learned Dr. Maame Sarpong, that the incapacity of the Respondent was cured by the ratification acts of the Board of the Respondent-company.

The Court also resisted the claim that the arbitration tribunal of the Ghana Arbitration Centre had jurisdiction owing to the failure of the Respondent to trigger pre-arbitration dispute resolution mechanisms per their contract and the failure of the respondents to demonstrate that they had a course of action against Justmoh Construction.

The Court thus upheld the delightful argumentation of the prolific Professor of Law, the learned Kwame Gyan [a copy can be read/downloaded below] on non-adherence to pre-arbitration dispute mechanisms agreed upon by the parties as a ground to set aside the arbitral award.

[Photo] Prof Kwame Gyan sandwiched by members of the Legal Team of Kwame Gyan & Associates and officers of Justmoh Construction Limited

Unjust enrichment

In an interesting analysis and infusion of equitable principles in setting aside arbitral awards, Justice Alifo undertook an analysis of the disposition of the law against unjust enrichment. His Lordship Alifo held at page 27 of the reported decision that "The Court has already found that the arbitral proceedings were vitiated by fundamental jurisdictional defects. Thus; lack of capacity, failure to exhaust mandatory pre-arbitration procedures, and absence of a valid cause of action. These findings alone are sufficient to set aside the award. However, the Court must also consider the equitable consequences of refusing the application"

The court further held on unjust enrichment that. In the result, "I find and hold that:

a. The Respondent seeks to recover through the arbitral award a sum of money it never expended, which would constitute unjust enrichment."

At page 29 of the reported decision which may be read/downloaded below, the Court delivered itself as follows: "In the premises, the arbitral award dated 10th December, 2025 is a nullity and is hereby set aside.Third, the Respondent did not have a valid cause of action against the Applicant in respect of the US$33,300,000 advance payment, as the payment was made by GPHA, not by the Respondent, and the Respondent had been divested of its contractual position by the GSA's termination of the Concession Agreement before the arbitration was commenced."

READ/DOWNLOAD JUDGMENT AND SUBMISSIONS OF THE COLLOSUS, PROF KWAME GYAN BELOW:

JUDGMENT

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS