JARMAKANI TRANS. LTD V. ABEKE

• Pages: 144-152

144



NIGERIAN SUPREME COURT CASES

[1963] N.S.C.C.

presented. That, Mr. Lardner has argued, is not a pretence of an existing fact, but

a statement of a future intention to have enough money in the bank on the date on

which the cheque may be presented for payment, which by itself cannot sustain a

count of obtainirg goods by false pretences; and Mr. Lardner has quoted, in sup-

port of his argument,

R.

v.

Dent,

39 Cr. App. R. 131 (also in {1955} 2 Q.B. 590,



5

and in {1955} 2 All E.R. 806).

Dent, who carried on the business of a pest-destructor, entered into contract

with a number of farmers, to destroy vermin on their land over a period of a year.

He asked for and received payment in advance of half the annual charge. In fact

he did no work under the contracts. He was convicted of obtaining money by false



10

pretences, but the view of the Court of Criminal Appeal was that a promise as to

future conduct not intended to be kept was not by itself a false pretence in crimi-

nal law, and the conviction was quashed.

Likewise, in the present case what the appellant did was in effect to promise

payment on certain future days, and although he did not intend to keep his promise,



15

such a promise by itself was not a false pretence within the meaning of section 419

of the Criminal Code.

It is only fair to the learned trial judge to add that neither

Dent

nor

Maytum-White

was cited to him. Although the appellant was not supposed to have goods on

credit, he was in fact allowed to have them on post-dated cheques - which meant



20

credit for a few days; and he had an account at the bank on which he could draw

cheques.

Parker's

case, on which the Crown relies, does not support the convic-

tion.

The conviction and sentence are quashed and a verdict of acquittal shall be

entered on both the counts of false pretences in the Lagos High Court Charge No.



25

LA/430962.

Appeal allowed.

30

JARMAKANI TRANS. LTD V. ABEKE

JARMAKANI TRANSPORT LTD



APPELLANTS



35

V

MADAM WULEMOTU ABEKE



RESPONDENT

SUIT NO. FSC 429/1961

FEDERAL SUPREME COURT.

BRETT,



F.J.



40

TAYLOR,



F.J.

COKER,



AG. F.J.

16th April, 1963.

Conznzercial Law - Master and Servant - Scope of employment - Prohibition



45

limiting it - Driver carrying passengers contrary to orders - Whether master

liable for his negligence.

ISSUE:

1. Whether an employer who makes a prohibition limiting its drivers' scope of



50

employment is liable for his negligence when acting outside the scope.