Court dismisses Association Int’l School’s injunction against Turkish contractor

An Accra High Court presided over by Justice Afua Novisi Aryene has dismissed an interim application for injunction against the Turkish contractor at the centre of the controversial 22-storey building at the Airport Residential area.

The Association International School had issued a writ against Kess Plus Construction, the Turkish constructor working on the project.

The court after hearing lawyers of the Association International School, the applicant, and the Kess Plus Construction Limited, respondent, ruled that the applicant has not been able to substantiate its claims of nuisance and other health concerns to warrant the grant of the injunction.

It was the ruling of the court that, the respondent stands to suffer irrepairable damages should the application be granted.

The court subsequently dismissed the application.

But Mrs Audrey Doryumu, the head of association international school who was disappointed with the ruling said they will appeal the court’s ruling.

No construction permit

Moving the application on behalf of the applicant, Lawyer Benjamin Sackar told the court that the respondent in question do not have the building permit from the statutory institution to raise such a project.

He also argued that the ongoing excavation work will cause irreparable damage to the applicant’s school and the residents around if not stopped.

According to counsel, the safety and the health needs of children, staff and residents in the area stand the greater risk should the court not stop the respondent.

It was also the case of the applicant that the noise level of the respondent’s work is one that the applicant and its neighbours cannot bear.

He argued further that apart form cracks on the roads as a result of the respondent’s excavation work, the proxity to the applicant’s school and children is a great concern.

Counsel informed the court about the fact that the Town and Country Planning of the Ayawaso West Wuogon Municipal Assembly confirmed that, it has not issued any working permit for the construction of the project.

Lawyer Sackar told the court that, construction activities comes with its exponential risk and therefore, the applicant, staff, children have been unlawfully been put at risk with the respondent’s work.

He told the court that, the applicant is unable to trust that the respondent would do a good Work and therefore pray for the application to be granted.

Respondent argument

Lawyer of the respondent in the matter Samani Zakaria Mohammed while opposing the application argued that the applicant do not have capacity to initiate such action.

According to him, the applicant has not exhausted all the statutory channel to address the matter even though he admits that “we have not acquired the permit to construct the supper structure until we get the permit”

It was the contention of counsel that, the local authorities have been given the statutory powers to deal with matters of this nature and therefore if there was any danger as alleged by the applicant, it is the local assembly that ought to have determined and not the applicant coming to court.

He argued that should the court grants the application in favour of the applicant, that would mean the same statutory powers that were given to the statutory bodies have been denied them.

He contended that the applicant has not shown to the court that they have complied with all the processes and also nowhere have they shown legal interest that the activities of the respondent will hurt them.

On the issue of cracks of the roads, counsel argued that it was not an issue of the applicant to determine, especially when the assembly had visited the construction scene and assessed the situation.

In conclusion however, he urged the court not to accept the argument of the applicant because they have not established the case that the statutory bodies are nothing the position to carry out their mandate.