Chief Festus S.yesufu V. African Continental Bank Ltd (1981)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

BELLO, J.S.C. 

In the High Court of Bendel State sitting at Benin City, the Plaintiff, who is the Appellant in this Court, took out a writ of summons against the Defendants, the African Continental Bank, who are the Respondents in this Court, claiming:

“1. The sum of N610,942.52 being the value of bills of exchange or sight drafts for exported commodity negotiated and/ or discounted by the plaintiff with the Ring Road, Benin City Branch of the defendant bank but which, the defendant bank FAILED or neglected to pay to the plaintiff or to credit to plaintiff’s account with the defendant bank and/or CLAIMED TO HAVE SHORT-collected but without plaintiff’s prior consent, authority or knowledge and to his prejudice. In the alternative.

2. N700,000 being general damages for negligence or breach of duty by the defendant in their dealings with the plaintiff in the matter of the bills or drafts aforesaid.

PARTICULARS OF NEGLIGENCE:

1. Failure to get plaintiff’s authorisation for any short collection on the said bills and debiting same to his account without his consent;
2. Failure to notify the plaintiff on time of the dishonour by non-payment or non-payment according to its tenor of any of the bills on which payment is still outstanding wholly or in part.
3. Failure to return any bill allegedly not paid to the plaintiff and wrongfully debiting his account with the value thereof.”

The case for the Applicant as the trial as averred in his copious pleadings may be summarised thus:

1. That the Respondents negotiated and discounted his bills of lading specified in his pleadings and, with the exception of the bills reflected in Exhibits 7 to 27 A inclusive, at the time of discounting the Respondents credited his account with the proceeds of the discounted bills but subsequently, without his knowledge and consent, the Respondents debited his account with what appeared to be the face value of some of the very bills and also with what appeared to be the difference between the realised values of some of the bills and their face values.
2. That in the case of the bills reflected in Exhibits 7 to 27 A negotiated and discounted by the Respondents, the Respondents failed to account for any of them at all and did not credit his account with the proceeds of their discounted values and failed to return the bills to him; and
3. That the Respondents debited his account with the sum of ‘a310,099.4s.5d (Nigerian pound then) for devaluation of Pound Sterling when the transactions between him and the Respondents, and between him and his overseas customers were transacted in U. S. Dollars and Naira and that there was no devaluation of either currency at the material time. .

Paragraph 15 of the Amended Statement of Claim set out the particulars as follows:-

PARTICULARS OF CLAIM

Documents lodged with bank but

not credited s d

OBC 22/69 15,393 7 –

37/69 1,167 2 8

38/69 313 10 –

62/69 8,201 13 8

Unreturned OBC’s16/67 9,471 –