A deepening contractual dispute between McDan Aviation Handling Services Limited and Ghana Airports Company Limited has escalated into a full-blown legal and operational standoff over the management of a Fixed Base Operation (FBO) facility at Kotoka International Airport.
Both sides are trading accusations over unpaid contractual obligations, breaches of the agreement, and alleged defiance of a court injunction.
At the centre of the conflict is the termination of a licence agreement signed in August 2022 that granted McDan Aviation the right to operate a private aviation facility at Terminal 1 of the airport.
The agreement allowed the company to provide Fixed Base Operation services to private-jet and business-aviation clients in designated areas within the terminal.
In a statement issued on March 12, GACL said it had formally terminated the agreement after what it described as persistent non-payment of contractual fees by the aviation company.
According to the airport operator, the licence arrangement required McDan Aviation to pay licence fees, royalties, and rent in exchange for access to and use of the airport infrastructure.
However, GACL said the company began defaulting on its financial obligations shortly after the agreement came into effect in 2022.
The state-owned airport authority stated that despite several attempts to resolve the matter and recover the outstanding payments, the aviation company continued to fall behind on its obligations, triggering a series of enforcement measures.
One of those measures included restricting access to Terminal 1 in late 2024 after the arrears accumulated.
Following that restriction, GACL said McDan Aviation eventually settled arrears covering the period between 2022 and 2024, allowing its operations at the terminal to resume.
But the airport authority maintains that the financial difficulties persisted.
According to GACL, after clearing the earlier arrears, the company again accumulated substantial debt, failing to make rent and royalty payments throughout 2025, while the operating licence fee due since 2022 remained unpaid.
The airport operator said it subsequently invoked provisions in the agreement that allow termination after default.
As part of that process, GACL issued a 90-day termination notice on January 10, 2025, demanding that McDan Aviation settle the outstanding debt.
The notice was followed by three additional reminders during the year, urging the company to fulfil its financial obligations.
During the period, McDan Aviation reportedly proposed a payment arrangement and issued three post-dated cheques as part of a settlement plan.
However, the airport authority said the company later asked it not to deposit the cheques due to financial constraints.
A further notice was issued in November 2025, reminding the company that it remained in default.
After the expiration of the contractual notice period and several reminders, GACL said it formally terminated the FBO licence agreement on January 16, 2026.
The airport authority subsequently notified the company that any payments made after the termination would be treated strictly as settlement of outstanding debts and would not restore the agreement.
In early February, the dispute moved from administrative correspondence to physical control of the facility.
On February 9, 2026, GACL secured and locked Terminal 1 and requested that McDan Aviation remove its equipment and belongings from the premises within seven days, in accordance with the termination provisions of the contract.
The airport authority said several reminders were sent to the company instructing it to clear its equipment and property from the facility, but the company did not respond.
Despite the termination of the agreement, McDan Aviation later made a payment on February 27, 2026, equivalent to about US$265,000 in Ghana cedis.
GACL said the payment represents roughly half of the outstanding debt owed and would be treated solely as a partial settlement rather than a reinstatement of the terminated licence.
The airport operator indicated that it would continue to pursue the remaining balance of the debt, including seeking recovery from the wider McDan Group. The dispute has been further complicated by another legal conflict involving land development at the airport.
GACL disclosed that the McDan Group is already engaged in a separate legal dispute with the airport authority over a 16-acre parcel of land within the airport enclave.
According to the airport operator, commercial properties have been developed on that land and are currently being rented out, even though millions of dollars in obligations allegedly remain unpaid.
The airport authority stressed that the FBO agreement with McDan Aviation Handling Services has been fully terminated and that there is no legal basis for further engagement regarding FBO operations at Terminal 1.
It also issued a broader caution to companies operating within the airport enclave, warning that firms that fail to honour their contractual financial obligations will face the full debt recovery measures provided for under their agreements.
However, McDan Aviation has strongly rejected the airport operator’s claims and has accused GACL of violating both contractual provisions and a court order.
In its own statement released on March 12, the company alleged that officials from the airport authority carried out what it described as a “midnight operation” at Terminal 1 in defiance of a court injunction.
The company said GACL’s actions were designed to collapse its business and undermine Ghana’s first indigenous Fixed Base Operation service provider.
McDan Aviation said it had invested millions of dollars to develop what it describes as Ghana’s first private FBO terminal at the airport.
The facility, it said, has helped position Ghana as a premium hub for private aviation, tourism, and international investment.
According to the company, the project represents a landmark step in the development of the country’s private aviation infrastructure. McDan Aviation also disputed the claim that it had persistently defaulted on its obligations.
The company maintained that it had honoured its financial commitments throughout its operations, including periods when the facility was not operational.
It acknowledged a delay in rent payments but insisted it was temporary and due to operational challenges linked to the broader global economic environment.
According to the company, the outstanding payments were eventually settled in good faith.
McDan Aviation argued that portraying the delay as a fundamental breach of contract misrepresents the nature of its long-standing relationship with the airport authority.
The company also said it had repeatedly attempted to engage GACL to resolve the dispute, but claimed those efforts were declined. Another major point of contention relates to the termination process.
McDan Aviation says the licence agreement governing its operations clearly requires the airport authority to provide a 90-day notice before any eviction action can be taken.
The company claims that GACL failed to comply with this requirement and therefore breached the agreement. The dispute took an even more dramatic turn after the matter entered the courts.
According to McDan Aviation, GACL was formally served with a motion for an interlocutory injunction on March 10, 2026, seeking to restrain the airport authority from interfering with its operations pending the resolution of the dispute.
Despite the injunction, the company alleges that officials from GACL entered the terminal facility in the early hours of March 11 at around 1:00 a.m.
McDan Aviation claims the officials forcibly entered the premises and removed valuable equipment and property belonging to the company.
The company described the incident as a deliberate act carried out in defiance of the court process.
It argues that the action represents not only a breach of contractual obligations but also contempt for the rule of law.
McDan Aviation says it is pursuing all available legal remedies to challenge what it describes as the unlawful termination of its licence and the seizure of its assets.
The company also reiterated its commitment to Ghana’s aviation sector and called for stronger support for local enterprises operating within strategic national industries.
As a wholly Ghanaian-owned business under the McDan Group, the company said it remains committed to collaboration, national development, and the advancement of the country’s aviation industry.
The dispute now appears set to move fully into the courts, where the competing claims over contractual compliance, financial obligations, and alleged violations of judicial orders will likely be tested.
For Ghana’s aviation sector, the outcome of the case could have broader implications for how airport concessions, private aviation services, and public-private partnerships are structured and enforced in the future.
