MUKETE & ORS. V. NIGERIAN BROADCASTING CORP

• Pages: 230-233

230



NIGERIAN SUPREME COURT CASES

[1961

j

N.S.C.C.

In the absence of a specific finding by the trial magistrate, the only conclusion that

can be drawn from the evidence as the magistrate saw it is that the 4th prosecu-

tion witness was a volunteer. Thus it has not been established that the appellant

took the £5 from her without her consent, and an essential ingredient of the offence

of stealing has not been proved against the appellant. It was argued that the of-



5

fence would not have been stealing even if the money had been paid in conse-

quence of a demand made by the appellant, but it is unnecessary for us to express

an opinion on that question. The appeal is allowed.

Appeal allowed:

Conviction quashed.



10

MUKETE & ORS V. NIGERIAN BROADCASTING

CORPORATION.

VICTOR MUKETE AND OTHERS



APPELLANTS

V

NIGERIAN BROADCASTING

CORPORATION



RESPONDENTS

SUIT NO. FSC 291/1961

FEDERAL SUPREME COURT.

BRETT,



Ag. C.J.F.

MBANEFO,



C.J.E.R.

BELLAMY,



Ag. C.J.

18th September 1961.

Tort - Libel and Slander - Defamatory Radio Broadcast - Libel or Slander -

Statutory corporation - Privilege - Whether statutory corporation exempt from

liability for defamation committed in exercise of statutory duty - Nigeria

Broadcasting Corporation Ordinance Cap 133, section 10(1)

Evidence - No judicial notice of internal arrangements of Statutory corporation.

Practice and Procedure - Pleading - Slander - Absence of plea that defamatory

words were spoken of plaintiffs in relation to offices held by them - Absence

of plea of innuendo - Effect - Special Damage.

ISSUES:

1.

What is the onus on a statutory body wishing to establish that it is exempt from

the general law of the land in matters which may affect the reputation of others

(Le. how does a statutory body establish privilege as a defence to a libel or

slander action).

2.

Whether the internal arrangements of a Broadcasting Corporation can be

regarded as a matter of common knowledge to entitle the court to take judicial

notice of it.

3.

Whether a plaintiff in an action for defamation can succeed, in the absence of

pleading innuendo, without pleading and proving special damage.

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50