<<Print>>

The Supreme Court on Thursday adjourned a suit by Martin Amidu challenging a claim of $ 1.3million by Spanish company Isofoton SA as judgment debt. According to Mr. Amidu, Isofoton SA had no legitimate contract with government and had no business making any such claims from government. Mr. Amidu sued the Attorney-General, Isofoton S. A. of Montalban, Madrid, Spain and Anane-Agyei Forson, a Ghanaian citizen and agent of Isofoton S. A., and is seeking nine declarations including what he says is the illegal payment made to Isofoton by the government. At the Supreme Court yesterday, the nine-member panel presided over by Justice Date-Bah adjourned the matter to March 5, for defendants in the suit to put their house in order regarding change of solicitor and also for them to adopt the right procedure of filing processes. This was after Sylvia Agbesi, a state attorney, who represented the Attorney-General in the matter, prayed for time to file her statement of defence and the court had observed that there was change of solicitor for Isofoton and Anane Adjei. The court granted the state attorney the opportunity to file the statement of defence within seven days. The company is seeking over $1.3 million judgment debt against government for what it claimed was a breach of contract. The judgment debt is the result of the abrogation of a contract with the company by the Kufuor administration, for the supply and installation of solar powered irrigation systems in the rural areas. Isofoton sued the government over the abrogation of the contract and government entered into an agreement to pay a settlement fee of $1.3 million. It however defaulted in making the full payment, forcing Isofoton to go back to the courts to obtain an order to freeze the accounts of the Engineering Department of the ministry. This ostensibly means that government must pay the outstanding amount in order to defreeze the accounts of the department. The Mills-Mahama administration has since paid part of the money. Mr. Amidu�s case is that it was wrong for the High Court to have entertained Isofoton S. A.�s suit against the Republic of Ghana on grounds that Isofoton lacked the locus standi and a cause of action to commence the action in the first place because of the absence of any operative contract with the Government of Ghana. His writ seeks nine declarations, including an interpretation of Article 181 of the Constitution, as regards Isofoton S. A. and Mr. Anane-Agyei Forson in making claims against the Government of Ghana when they knew that there was no operative contract with the Government of Ghana.