Eva Anike Akomolafe & Anor Vs Guardian Press Limited (Printers) & Ors (2009)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report

ONNOGHEN, J.S.C. 

The appellants, as plaintiffs in the trial court, claimed, in paragraph 19 of their Amended Statement of Claim, particularly at page 254 of the record as follows:

(i) N 8 Million being damages for libel published of and concerning the 1st plaintiff.

(ii) N 3,105, 000.00 being damages for libel; published of and concerning the 2nd plaintiff.

(iii) An injunction restraining the Defendants, their servants and/or agents from further publishing the said and or similar words of the plaintiffs.”

In a judgment delivered on the 7th day of October, 2999, the learned trial judge upheld the defenses pleaded by the defendants and accordingly dismissed the case of the plaintiffs resulting in an appeal to the Court of Appeal which was also dismissed. The instant appeal is against the judgment of the Court of Appeal.

The alleged libel said to have been falsely and maliciously published of and concerning the appellants by the respondents is said to be contained in the issue of “THE GUARDUAN” Newspaper dated the 2nd day of September, 1985 at pages 1 & 12 under the heading: “COMPANIES REGISTRY IN SHAMBLES”. The publication is said to be in the way of the profession and office of the appellants and their conduct therein. The write up is as follows:

“The Guardian discovered that agents, touts and clerical staff and sometimes highly placed officials of the registry have been doing brisk illegal business at the Registry and Nepotism has also featured in the list of Companies (sic) being leveled at the Registry. It is common knowledge at the Registry that the husband of one of topmost officials at the Registry is a lawyer with an office in the business centre of Lagos Island. It is said that the husband also registers companies for clients and the fact of his wife being a top official at the registry could be an exploirable coincidence. The Guardian saw a complimentary which the lawyer-husband had minuted to his wife requesting that a client be helped to register a company.”

Again in the issue of “THE GUARDIAN” Newspaper of the 6th day of October, 1985, the respondents were said to have falsely and maliciously written, printed and published of and concerning the 1st appellant in the way of her profession and office and of her conduct therein the following words, that is to say:

“Indeed as rightly pointed out in your report, the situation has been further compounded by bore-faced nepotism and utter insensitively in high quarters”.

And

“as a first step, the inept leadership at the Registry must be changed forthwith in order to give office a fresh lease of life. Secondly a thorough investigation must be set in motion to probe the allegations of corruptions, graft and nepotism said to pervade the place.”

The respondents are also alleged to have falsely and maliciously printed and published of the 1st appellants and of her profession and office and conduct therein in the issue of “THE GUARDIAN” Newspaper of the 9th day of December, 1985 the following orders:-

“The Registry was closed down a day after the Guardian on Sunday carried a front page report detailing the graft, corruption, nepotism and the storage cum retrieval (sic) problems said to be hampering efficiency and fair-play at the Registry. One of the immediate steps taken to re-organize it was the retirement of the former registrar, Mrs. A.E. Akomolafe.”