ANYAEBOSI & ORS V. R.T. BRISCOE NIG. LTD.
| Pages | 805-824 |
ANYAEBOSI & ORS V. R.T. BRISCOE NIG. LTD.
805
ANYAEBOSI & ORS V. R.T. BRISCOE NIG. LTD.
MRS ELIZABETH ANYAEBOSI
APPELLANTS
(For herself and on behalf
0
of the family of Innocent
Ositadinma Anyaebosi,
deceased)
V
R.T. BRISCOE (NIG) LIMITED
RESPONDENT
5
SUIT NO. SC 169/1985
SUPREME COURT OF NIGERIA
OBASEKI, •
J.S.C.
NNAMANI,
J.S.C.
UWAIS,
J.S.C.
KARIBI-WHYTE,
J.S.C.
BELGORE,
J.S.C.
5th June, 1987
Appeal - Leave to appeal - Not proper to grant leave lightly or as a 'natter of
15
course - Leave not to be granted where two concurrent findings of fact exist.
Evidence - Admission of documents rendered absolutely inadmissible by statute
- Rejection on appeal - Entries in book of account alone not sufficient to
charge a person with liability - S.90(3) Evidence Act, meaning of "person
30
interested."
Practice and Procedure - Judgment - Should be given only for• amount proved
in evidence, though higher amount claimed.
35
Words and Phrases - "Person interested" - Meaning of.
ISSUES:
1. Whether the Supreme Court will on appeal disturb concurrent findings of facts
made by the lower courts.
10
2. Whether inadmissible evidence admitted at trial will be rejected on appeal.
3. Whether the mere fact that the maker of a statement tendered in evidence is in
the employment of a party to an action by itself makes him a "person interested"
in proceedings within s.90(3) of the Evidence Act.
FACTS:
15
In the Lagos High Court, the respondent took out a writ of summons against
the appellant, claiming N60,935.10 plus interest, as the balance due from the ap-
pellant in respect of goods sold to him by the respondent. At the trial the respond-
ent's witness tendered a copy of the statement of account, Exhibit P.4, which was
certified to be a true copy by the respondent company's Senior Accountant. The
50
appellant filed a statement of defence and counter-claimed N27,638.58 being the
excess amount he claimed to have paid in respect of the said goods. The trial
judge admitted Exhibit P4 as there was no objection raised as to its admissibility
and he allowed the claim based on it, giving judgment for the respondent in the
806
NIGERIAN SUPREME COURT CASES
[1987] 2 N.S.C.C.
amount claimed. The appellant died while his appeal to the Court of Appeal was
pending and his widow with leave of court commenced the appeal on his behalf.
The appellant's appeal was unsuccessful and he further appealed to the Supreme
Court, where as in the Court of Appeal, serious objection was raised to the ad-
mission of Exhibit P4. The grounds of appeal in the Supreme Court were aimed
at upsetting the concurrent findings of fact in the lower courts.
HELD:
1.
When concurrent findings of facts are made by lower courts, such findings will
not be disturbed on further appeal to the Supreme Court unless exceptional
circumstances exist to justify doing so. The appellant in his application to the
Court of Appeal failed to show any such circumstance. The application was
simply granted as a matter of course.
2.
The general rule that where inadmissible evidence is admitted at trial it must be
rejected on appeal, is subject to the exception of documents or evidence which
is admissible under certain conditions. Where such evidence. as Exhibit P.4 in
the instant case, are admitted without objection, the appellant cannot complain
against the admission on appeal.
3.
The mere fact that the maker of a statement tendered in evidence is an employee
of a party to an action (as the respondent's Senior Accountant who made Exhibit
P4 was in this case), does not by itself make him a "person interested" in
proceedings within s.90(3) of the Evidence Act.
CASES REFERRED
TO
IN JUDGMENT:
1.
Lokoyi v. Olojo
(1983) 8 S.C. 68 at 68.
2.
Overseas Construction (Nig) Ltd. v. Creek Enterprises (Nig) Limited & Anor
(1985) 3 N.W.L.R. 407 at 413.
3.
Onobruchere & Anor v. Esegine & Anor
(1986) 1 N.W.L.R. 799 at 804.
4.
Alade v. Olukade
(1976) 1 All N.L.R. 67.
5.
Yassin v. Barclays Bank DCO
(1968) 1 All N.L.R. 171.
6.
Chukwurah Akunne v. Mathias Ekwunno
14 W.A.C.A. 59 at 117.
7.
Alashe v. Ilu
(1964) 1 All N.L.R. 390 at 397.
8.
Kofi v. Kofi
1 W.A.C.A. 284.
9.
The
Stool of Abinabina v. Chief Kojo Enyimadu
12 W.A.C.A. 171 at 173.
10.Enang v. Adu
(1981) 11 - 12 S.C. 25 at p.42.
11.0kagbue v. Romaine
(1982) 5 S.C. 133 at p. 170.
12.0jomu v. Ajao
(1983) 9 S.C. 22 at p. 53.
13.Kate Enterprises Ltd. v. Daewoo (Nig) Ltd.
(1985) 2 N.W.L.R. (Part 5) 116.
14.
Holman Bros. (Nigeria) Limited v. Kigo (Nig) Limited & Anor
(1980) 8-11
S.C. 43.
15.
Ex
parte Gilchrist, in re Armstrong
(1886-87) 17 Q. B.D. 521.
16.Ajayi v. Fisher
1 F.S.C. 97.
17.Esso West Africa Incorporated v. Alli
(1968) N.M.L.R. 414 at p. 423.
18.Jacker v. International Cable Co. Ltd.
(1888) L.T.R. 13.
19.Onwonyin v. Omotosho
(1961) 1 All N.L.R. 304 at p. 308.
20.
Cavalotti Govianni v. Bonaso Luigi
S.C. 402/67 of 31/10/69.
21.
Gilbert v. Endean
(1878) Ch. D. 259.
22.Holton v. Holton
(1946) 2 All E.R. 534 at p. 535.
23. Bearmans Limited & Anor v. Metropolitan Police District Receiver,
(1961) 1
W.L.R. 634 at p. 655
24.Kelleher v. T. Wall & Sons Limited
(1958) 2 Q.B. 346.
25.Kasali Rairni v. Alhaji Akintoye
S.C. 226/1984 delivered on 5/5/86.
26.1kenye v. Ofunne
(1985) 2 N.W.L.R. (pt. 5).1.
27.Jarman v. Lambert and Cooke (Contractors) Limited
(1951) 2 All E.R. 255 at
p. 261.
To continue reading
Request your trial