Cyril Ojini V. Ogo Oluwa Motors Nigeria Ltd. (1998)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report

OGWUEGBU, J.S.C

This appeal is against the decision of the Court of Appeal, Enugu Division delivered on 8th December, 1989 reducing to N15,000.00 the sum of N64,000.00 special damages awarded in favour of the plaintiff by the learned trial judge.

The facts of the case are that the plaintiff who was a transporter bought on hire purchase, a Peugeot Saloon Car Registration No.IM 6593 L from the defendant’s agent Mr. Titus Ogbara trading in the name and style of Doherty Motors & Co. (Nig.) The plaintiff paid a deposit of N3,000.00 with promise to liquidate the balance of N6,600.00 in ten equal monthly installments. The plaintiff used the car as a taxi and made a daily income of N80.00. The installments were paid as and when due and the last installment being on 18th August, 1980. On or about 25th August, 1980, at Ediba in the Cross River State, the defendant seized and took away the said car. By reason of the said seizure, the plaintiff alleged that he was unable to carry on his taxi business and was in consequence, deprived of the profits of N80.00 per day for 800 days. The plaintiff reported the seizure to the police whereupon Titus Ogbara was tried and convicted by an Ugep Chief Magistrate’s Court in charge No. MUG/403C/80. The court ordered that the car be returned to the plaintiff. The defendant surrendered the motor-car to the plaintiff on 2nd November, 1992 when confronted with the order of the court He claimed the sum of N64,000.00 “being general and/or special damages for trespass to goods and or conversion” for the period 25:8:80 to 2:11:82.

The defendant Ogo Oluwa Motors (Nig.) Ltd. denied the plaintiffs claim. It was its case that about 10;12;79, it sold on hire purchase the very same motor vehicle to one Femi Ogbara who paid a deposit of N3,000.00 with an undertaking to liquidate the balance by monthly installments of N630.00. Femi Ogbara paid only two installments and in August, 1980 the defendant seized the car through its agents. At the time of seizure, the sum of N5,270.00 was outstanding. Following a court order, he returned the vehicle to the plaintiff. He counter-claimed the value of the said motor vehicle as at November, 1982 and general damages.

After reviewing the evidence and the applicable law, the learned trial Judge awarded N64,000.00 as claimed and dismissed the defendant’s counter-claim. He stated:

“In the event, there will be judgment for special damages for the detention and conversion of the plaintiffs car from 25-8-80 to 21-11-82. The plaintiffs claim therefore succeeds and there will be judgment for the plaintiff in the sum of N64,000.00 with costs of N400 in his favour. In the event, the defence and counter-c1aim of the defendants are hereby dismissed.”

Aggrieved by the decision, the defendant appealed to the Court of Appeal, Enugu Division. As stated above, the court below allowed the appeal, set aside the award of N64,000.000 as damages and substituted an award of N15,000.00. Dissatisfied with the decision of the Court of Appeal, the plaintiff appealed to this court.

Briefs of argument were filed by the plaintiff and the defendant who will be referred to as appellant and respondent respectively in this judgment. The appellant formulated three issues for determination in the appeal. The issues read:

“1. Was the plaintiff also entitled to succeed in conversion

2. Was the Court of Appeal justified in interfering with the damages awarded by the trial judge without showing that the Judge acted on wrong principle

In interfering with the damages awarded by substituting the sum of N15,000.00 it assessed for N64,000.00 awarded by the trial court, whether the Court of Appeal applied the wrong principle”

On its own part, the respondent urged the court to determine the following questions:

“(i) Was the Court of Appeal right to hold that the appellant cannot sue the respondent in conversion

(ii) Assuming but without conceding that the appellant could sue in conversion what is the measure of damages

(iii) Was the Court of Appeal right to interfere with the trial court’s award of N64,000.00”