EKE V. THE MID-WESTERN NIGERIA DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION

• Pages: 254-256

254



NIGERIAN SUPREME COURT CASES

[1968] N.S.C.C.

argued that it was negligent to discharge the goods from cold storage into an open

lighter where they were likely speedily to go bad, but as the tort of negligence, as

opposed to breach of contract was never pleaded we did not allow him to argue

further in this regard, especially as in any case the discharge into the lighter had

been on the direction of Barclays Bank D.C.O. (the consignees) and Intercotra



5

Ltd. (the endorsees) took delivery on the instructions of the shippers and found

the potatoes in good condition.

Finally there was argument on the general ground of appeal that the decision

was unreasonable having regard to the evidence but as there was no substance

in the argument we do not propose to deal with it.



10

The appeal is accordingly dismissed with 39 guineas costs to the respondents.

Appeal Dismissed.

15

EKE V. THE MIDWESTERN NIGERIA

DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION

S. Y. EKE



APPLICANT

V

THE MIDWESTERN NIGERIA

DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION



RESPONDENTS

SUIT NO. SC 122/1968

SUPREME COURT OF NIGERIA

ADEMOLA,



C.J.N.

COKER,



J.S.C.

MADARIKAN,



J.S.C.

15th November, 1968.

Practice and Procedure - Appeal - Appeal to High Court front certificate issued

by Director of Audit - Whether right of further appeal exists.

Legislation - Constitution of the Federation S.117(4)(c) - Statutory Corporations

(Debtors) Edict, 1966, ss.5(1), 5(3), S.

ISSUES:

1.

Whether a right of further appeal exists under S.117(4)(c) of the 1963

Constitution from a High Court's decision on appeal from a certificate issued

by the Director of Audit.

2.

Can an Appeal Court confer a right of appeal on an applicant who has no

statutory right of appeal.

FACTS:

Pursuant to the provisions of the Statutory Corporations (Debtors) Edict, 1966,

of the Midwestern State, the Auditor had issued a certificate showing that the ap-

plicant was indebted to the Midwestern Nigeria Development Corporation in a cer-

tain amount. The applicant appealed against the Auditor's findings to the High

Court, as provided for in the Edict. The High Court dismissed the appeal, and the

applicant applied to the High Court for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court, but

his application was refused. He appealed to the Supreme Court against the High

Court's decision. The issue before the Supreme Court, among others, was

whether or not there was any right of appeal to the Court.

20

25

30

35

40

45

50