BANK OF WEST AFRICA LTD. V. BALOGUN

• Pages: 41-44

BANK OF WEST AFRICA LTD. V. BALOGUN



41

appeal was sent to Ughelli and it is not a clear case for the application of the pro-

visions of Order VIII, rule 4 (2) which we have quoted before.

Howbeit, we are satisfied that the appellant executed his notice of appeal and

delivered it to a recognised channel within time and we are not prepared to hold

5



that it was "given" outside the prescribed time limit. This point is being decided

by us in this case as a matter of fact and the circumstances attending other cases

either

ex facie

or proved may compel a different finding on a similar point.

However, having heard the appeal on the merits, we did, as stated before, come

to the conclusion that it should be dismissed and it was dismissed.

10



Appeal dismissed.

BANK OF WEST AFRICA LTD. V. BALOGUN

15

BANK OF WEST AFRICA LTD.

V

20 ALHAJI LAWAL BALOGUN

SUPREME COURT OF NIGERIA

COKER,



J.S.C.

LEWIS,



J.S.C.

25 FATAI-WILLIAMS, J.S.C.

27th February, 1970.

APPELLANT

RESPONDENT

SUIT NO. SC 9/1968

Tort - Detinue - Plaintiff alleging existence of Custom between defendant and

plaintiff - Judge accepting evidence of plaintiff on point - Evidence of

30





defendant contradictory - Whether judge was right in finding for the plaintiff

- Plaintiff's case in detinue with alternative claim in damages - Defendants

selling goods in the meantinu' thereby making it impossible for them to deliver

goods to plaintiff - Defendants liable in damages for loss of goods subject to

rules on remoteness of daniages.

35

ISSUE:

1.

What criteria must a trial Judge use in deciding whether a party has proved his

claim in a civil case?

FACTS:

40





The Appellants, the Bank of West Africa Ltd. were the defendants in an action

instituted by the Respondent who claimed delivery of some cartons of goods or

in the alternative general and special damages for the unlawful detention of the

goods.

The Respondent alleged the existence of a certain custom which the Appellants

45



were unable to deny categorically. The trial Judge found sufficient evidence to

substantiate the custom alleged by the Appellant and gave judgment in his favour.

On appeal, counsel for the Appellant contended that the trial Judge should not

have found on the evidence that the custom alleged by the Respondent truly did

exist. While the trial Judge had accepted the evidence of the Respondent, he had

50





rejected the evidence by which the Appellants had sought to counter the Respond-

ent's evidence which did not deny outright the existence of such a custom.