IJEBU-ODE L.O. V. ADEDEJI BALOGUN & CO.

• Pages: 1-24

LIEBU-ODE L.G.V. ADEDEJI BALOGUN & CO.

IJEBU-ODE

L.O.

V. ADEDEJI BALOGUN & CO.

APPELLANT

RESPONDENT

APPEAL NO. SC. 22/1989.

IJEBU-ODE LOCAL GOVERNMENT

V.

10

ADEDEJI BALOGUN & CO. LTD.

SUPREME COURT OF NIGERIA

BELLO,

C.J.N.

UWAIS,

J.S.C.

KARIBI-WHYTE,

J.S.C.

KAWU,

J.S.C.

WALT,

J.S.C.

20

OLATAWURA,

J.S.C.

AKPATA,

J.S.C.

11th

January. 1991.

15

25

Χουρτ −

ϑυρισδιχτιον − Λαχκ οφ − Ωηεν ανδ ωηο χαν ραισε ιτ − Ωηετηερ παρτιεσ χαν βψ χονσεντ

χονφερ ιτ ον τηε χουρτ − Αµενδµεντ οφ πλεαδινγσ − Ωηετηερ χουρτ ηασ ποωερ το γραντ −

Ωηεν προπερ, ανδ ωηεν ιτ µαψ βε ρεφυσεδ − ϑυδιχιαλ αχτ − Νυλλιτψ οφ − Αττιτυδε οφ χουρτ

τηερετο.

30

Χονστιτυτιοναλ Λαω − Σ.

258(1), 1979 χονστιτυτιον − ∋Φιναλ αδδρεσσεσ∋ τηερεοφ − Ηοω

χονστρυεδ.

Χοντραχτ−

Βυιλδινγ χοντραχτ − Βρεαχη οφ − Ασσεσσµεντ οφ δαµαγεσ − Αππλιχαβλε πρινχιπλεσ

−

Γενεραλ ανδ σπεχιαλ δαµαγεσ − ∆ιστινχτιον βετωεεν τηε τωο − Ωηετηερ προπερ το µακε.

35

∆αµαγεσ −

Βυιλδινγ χοντραχτ − Βρεαχη οφ − Ασσεσσµεντ οφ δαµαγεσ − Αππλιχαβλε πρινχιπλεσ

−

Γενεραλ ανδ σπεχιαλ δαµαγεσ − ∆ιστινχτιον βετωεεν τηε τωο − Ωηετηερ προπερ το µακε.

Εϖιδενχε − Υνχοντραδιχτεδ εϖιδενχε − Ωηετηερ τηε χουρτ ισ βουνδ το αχχεπτ ιτ.

Ιντερπρετατιον ανδ Χονστρυχτιον −

∋Φιναλ αδδρεσσεσ∋ ιν Σ.258(1) οφ τηε 1979 Χονστιτυτιον

-

40

Χονστρυχτιον οφ.

Πραχτιχε ανδ Προχεδυρε −

∋Φιναλ αδδρεσσεσ∋ ιν σεχτιον 258(1) οφ τηε 1979 Χονστιτυτιον −

Μεανινγ ανδ εσσενχε οφ − ∆ισχρετιον οφ χουρτ − Εξερχισε οφ − Ινϖιτατιον το χουνσελ φορ

φυρτηερ αδδρεσσ βεφορε ϕυδγµεντ − Προπριετψ οφ − Ωηεν ιτ χαν βε χηαλλενγεδ − Ωηεν τηε

45

εξερχισε οφ συχη α δισχρετιον µαψ βε ινιερφερρεδ ωιτη − Αµενδµεντ οφ πλεαδινγσ − Ποωερ

οφ χουρτ τηερεβψ − Ωηεν αν αµενδµεντ σηουλδ βε αλλοωεδ − Χουρτ λαχκινγ ϕυρισδιχτιον

− Ωηετηερ τηε φαιλυρε οφ παρτιεσ το σο στατε χαν ινϖεστ τηε χουρτ ωιτη τηε ϕυρισδιχτιον −

Ωηετηερ τηε χουρτ µαψ συο µοω ραισε τηε ισσυε οφ ϕυρισδιχτιον − ϑυδιχιαλ αχτ − Νυλλιτψ

οφ − Αττιτυδε οφ χουρτ τηερετο.

50

Ωορδσ ανδ Πηρασεσ − ∋Φιναλ αδδρεσσεσ∋ ιν σεχτιον 258(1) οφ τηε 1979 Χονστιτυτιον − Μεανινγ

οφ

2

NIGERIAN SUPREME COURT CASES

[1991] 1 N.S.C.C.

ISSUES:

1.

How may the court treat a void judicial act?

2.

Whether the issue of jurisdiction can be raised at any stage of the proceedings?

3.

Whether a trial judge can call for further addresses from counsel for clarification

of obscure issues?

4.

How may 'General' and 'Special' damages be defined?

5.

How may the court treat an uncontradicted evidence?

6.

When may the court refuse an amendment of pleadings?

FACTS:

The plaintiff/respondent is a building contractor who was awarded the contract

(by the defendant/appellant) to build Ita-Osu market complex in Ijebu-Ode for the

sum of N12,760,540.99k. A formal contract was signed by both parties on the 11th

February, 1980. On the 2nd of July, 1980, the defendant/appellant unilaterally

terminated the contract on the ground that the plaintiff/respondent had failed to

perfect the conditions of the award of the contract. On the 13th August, 1980, the

plaintiff/respondent instituted an action at the Ijebu-Ode High Court claiming,

inter

a/ia,

a declaration that the termination of the contract was wrongful, improper and

constituted a breach of contract; and N3,000,000 (three million naira) as special

and general damages. Pleadings were filed and served. In respect of its claim for

general damages, the plaintiff pleaded in error in paragraph 16 of its statement of

claim that 'the plaintiff anticipates a net profit margin of 20% of N2,552,108.00 of

the contract on successful completion of the contract' instead of, 'the plaintiff

anticipates a profit margin of 20% of the contract price (amounting to N2,552,108)

on the successful completion of the contract.'

On the 3rd of May, 1983, the first of the addresses by counsel was delivered

and on the 17th of May, 1983, learned counsel to the plaintiff/respondent con-

cluded his address.The case was adjourned for judgment to the 30th of June, 1983.

Judgment was, however, not delivered on that day, i.e. on the 30th of June. On

the 27th of July, 1983, the learned Judge requested counsel to the parties to

address him further on some issues formulated

suo motu

by him which he

considered very important for the just determination of the case. On the 4th of

August, 1983, counsel addressed the court, and judgment was delivered on the

21st of October, 1983. The trial Judge gave judgment in favour of the plaintiff/re-

spondent, and declared the termination of the contract wrongful and a breach of

contract. It, however, awarded the sum of N25,000 as general damages and

N18,433.23 as special damages.

•

The plaintiff/respondent appealed to the Court of Appeal against the N25,000

awarded it as general damages. The defendant/ appellant did not cross-appeal

but filed a respondent's notice seeking to vary the award of general damages to

the plaintiff, which it later withdrew and was struck out. The Court of Appeal

reversed the trial court's award of N25,000 general damages and in its stead it

awarded N2,552,108 which represents 20% of the contract price, the profit margin

which the plaintiff would have realised from the contract.

The defendant/appellant, dissatisfied with the judgment of the Court of Appeal,

appealed to the Supreme Court contending,

inter a/ia,

that the Court of Appeal

erred in law in basing the award of general damages on 20% of the contract sum

or price and that the Court of Appeal erred in law in entertaining an appeal upon

a judgment which was a nullity on the face of the record.

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50