Gopal Sri Ram JCA:

Let me say at the very outset that this appeal involves no question of principle. It involves, as do so many of the appeals that we are called upon to decide, a pure question of fact based upon the credibility of witnesses.

I am happily spared a recitation of the facts of this case. The history of the dispute, the state of the pleadings and the relevant evidence are all set out in extensoin the judgment of the learned judge. She has also identified the issues that she was called upon to try.

Before us, counsel for the appellant identified three issues, which he said, lay at the heart of the appeal. The first is whether the respondent had been employed as an architect for a project that the appellant had in plan. This question, said counsel, should receive a negative response. It was further submitted that even if the first question was answered in the affirmative, there was a second question the answer to which should be in the appellant's favour. That question is whether the employment had been by the appellant personally or whether it had been by the company of which the appellant was a director. Counsel complained that this issue was completely overlo