ITAMBONG & ORS V. AKONYE

• Pages: 120-123

120



NIGERIAN SUPREME COURT CASES

[1964] N.S.C.C.

giver. In this respect the case of

Rex v. William Oledima

6 W.A.C.A. 202 is perti-

nent. There the West African Court of Appeal held that:-

"Now to establish a charge of murder or manslaughter it must be proved not

merely that the act of the accused person could have caused the death of the



5

deceased, but that it did."

The fact that the defence did not suggest that death arose from other causes is

no confirmation of evidence which falls short of showing that death did arise as a

result of the appellant's act. The onus to establish this is not on the defence, it is



10

on the prosecution. For these reasons we allowed the appeal and made the order

to which we have already referred.

It should also be mentioned that Mr Nwokedi, for the respondent, was unable

to support the conviction.

15

ITAMBONG &

ORS

V. AKONYE

20

1.

1BOJE ITAMBONG

2.

OKON IBA



APPELLANTS

3.

IBANYO AYI

(for themselves and on behalf of the



25

people of AWI AROCHUKU-CALABAR

ROAD, CALABAR)

V

MICHAEL AKONYE



RESPONDENT

SUIT NO. FSC 8

1

/

1

963



30

SUPREME COURT OF NIGERIA

BRETT,



J.S.C.

TAYLOR,



J.S.C.

BAIRAMIAN,



J.S.C.

24th April, 1964



35

Torts - Trespass excused by statute - Authority employing contractor - Building

Lines Regulation Ordinance, Cap.28 in 1958 Laws of Federation etc., s.11.

ISSUES:



40

1.

Whether a public body authorised by law to carry out public works such as

maintainance of a road can delegate such authority to an independent

contractor.

2.

Whether such delegation will absolve the body from liability for any injury done

to a third party.



45

FACTS:

The three plaintiff's in a representative action sued the defendant, an inde-

pendent contractor for damages for trespass whether the defendant and his ser-

vants/work-men unlawfully broke and entered that land between mile 23 and 24 on

the Calabar- Arochuku Road, destroyed their farms and excavated and removed



50

gravel without thier consent or authority.

The authority responsible for the upkeep of the road was the Ministry of Works

and the Provinces Engineer had contractor out to the defendant the supply of gra-

vel, authorising him to do for gravel within the permitted distance from the road.