Klm Royal Dutch Airlines V. Jamilat Aloma (2007)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

PAUL ADAMU GALINJE, J.C.A.

By a writ of summons and a statement of claim both dated and filed on the 23rd December 1999, the Respondent herein claimed against the Appellant the following reliefs:-

“(i) The sums (sic) of $7,7650 (sic) (seven thousand seven hundred and sixty five US Dollars), 8,550.00 (eight thousand, five hundred and fifty pounds), and Lira 4,405,000 (four million four hundred and five thousand Lira) being the value of the goods and properties contained in the Plaintiffs baggage which was lost by the Defendant and whose total equivalent in Naira is N3,907,200,00 (three million, nine hundred and seven thousand, two hundred Naira)

(ii) The sum of $1,838,25 or N187,501.00 being the cost of return air ticket from Lagos to Amsterdam to Lagos which the Plaintiff had lost as a result of the Defendants unilateral decision to prevent the Plaintiff from stopping over at Amsterdam,

(iii) The sum of N5,000,000.00 (five million Naira) as damages for loss of expected profit and business goodwill in Amsterdam occasioned by the unilateral acts of the Defendant.

(iv) The sum of N5,000,000.00 (five million Naira) as damages for the Defendants violations of the plaintiffs fundamental right, false imprisonment and violation of human dignity.

(v) Interest on the above sums at the rate of 21% per annum from 15th October 1999 up till judgment and thereafter at the rate of 10% per annum until final liquidation.

(vi) Cost of this action.”

The Respondent’s eight paragraphs statement of defence is dated 21st January 2000 and filed on the 24th of January 2000. Thereafter the Plaintiff filed a reply to the statement of defence dated 16th February 2000. Pleadings having been exchanged the case was set down for trial. During the trial, the Respondent as Plaintiff testified as PW1 on the 10th May 2000. At the end of her testimony, the case was further adjourned to 27th June 2000 for cross-examination by Onu Esq. of counsel for the Respondent. Before the adjourned date the Respondent by an application dated 19th June 2000 and filed on the 21st of June 2000, sought for an order allowing the Respondent to amend its statement of defence. On the 27th of June 2000, the Respondent was represented by Tarfa Esq. of counsel, while the Appellant’s counsel was absent. This necessitated a further adjournment to 27th September 2000 for cross-examination. On the said date, the Appellant and its counsel were again absent, while the Respondent was represented by a counsel. The Court further adjourned the case to 27th October 2000 for cross-examination. On this date, Mr. Onu learned counsel for the Appellant appeared and cross-examined PW1 After the cross examination. Mr. Jolaowo, learned counsel for the Respondent closed their case. The trial Judge then adjourned the case to 27th January 2001 for defence. At this stage the Respondent filed a counter affidavit to the Appellant’s application to amend its statement of defence. The lower Court did not sit until 25th of September 2001 when the case was further adjourned to 13th November 2001. This time both parties were duly represented.

On the 13th November 2001, the Appellant and its counsel were absent in Court and the case was further adjourned to 12th February 2002. Both parties were represented on the said 12th February 2002, when the case was again adjourned to 14th March 2002 for argument on the application to amend the statement of defence. On this day, Mr. Oguniyi, learned counsel for the Appellant further asked for adjournment which was granted and the matter was further adjourned to 30th April 2002. On the 6th June 2002, Mr. Oguniyi withdrew the application to amend the statement of defence and same was struck out. Thereafter learned counsel for the Appellant, Mr. Oguniyi informed the court that negotiation for settlement out of Court had started between the parties. After a few adjournments, the same counsel informed the Court that negotiation had broken down. At this state the matter suffered few adjournments at the instance of the Appellant, and on the 24th of June 2003, when the Appellant and its counsel failed to put up appearance, the learned trial Judge, on the powers conferred on that Court by its rules, closed the Appellant’s defence and ordered for Respondent’s address. The Respondent filed a written address dated 22nd July 2003. Thereafter, in a reserved and considered judgment, which was delivered on the 25th day of September 2003, the lower Court granted to the Respondent all her claims.

It is against this judgment, the Appellant has brought this appeal. Its notice of appeal which is dated and filed on the 2nd of December 2003, contained five grounds of appeal.

In line with the relevant rules of this Court, the Appellant filed its brief of argument and a reply brief after the Respondent’s brief was served on it. Parties therefore exchanged briefs of argument.

At the hearing of the appeal, Candide-Johnson, learned senior counsel for the appellant identified the Appellant’s brief of argument dated 7th June 2004 and filed on the 8th June 2004 and the Appellant’s reply brief dated 28th February 2005 and filed on the 1st March 2005 and adopted both and relied on the argument contained therein.

Mrs. Opara, learned counsel for the Respondent identified the Respondent’s brief dated and filed on the 30th November 2004 and relied on the argument contained therein also.