Guinness (Nigeria) Plc V. Pat Onegbedan Esq. (2011)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

AMIRU SANUSI, J.C.A.(Delivering the Leading Judgment)

This is an appeal against the judgment of High Court of Edo State (hereinafter referred to as “the lower court”) delivered on 2nd day of February 2009. At the lower court, the present respondent as plaintiff thereat, instituted an action against the defendant now appellant, seeking payment of the under mentioned claims as per his Amended Statement of Claim. The claims are as below:-

a) The sum of N19, 944,090,00k (Nineteen Million, nine hundred and forty four thousand and ninety Naira only) being professional outstanding fees

b). 21% interest per annum from year 2000 up to the day of judgment and thereafter at 10% interest until final judgment is made less N306, 375.00 paid while the case was in court.”

The facts which gave rise to the institution of the suit at the lower court by the plaintiff against the defendant leading to the filing of this appeal are simply that, the respondent, a Benin based legal practitioner, served as a retainer to the appellant company for twelve years rendering legal services on its behalf on legal matters in South-South and South East Zones of this country. When a new company Director was appointed for the appellant sometimes in 1999, all payments due to the respondent for completed/concluded and pending cases and other legal services were stopped. The defendant thereafter wrote series of letters demanding for such payments and also made several personal visits to demand for the settlement of his outstanding entitlements but all to no avail. This led to the institution of the suit at the lower court for the recovery of his professional fees and accrued interest on same.

On the other hand, the defendant company vides its Statement of Defence, denied owing the plaintiff any outstanding professional fees and also denied appointing the plaintiff s as its solicitor or the existence contract between them at all, of any contract. It also pleaded that the plaintiff had breached contract by not concluding some of his cases and was thus not entitled to any such payment. The defendant also counter-claimed against the plaintiff/respondent in respect of some cases where it lost or was forced to enter settlement due to the plaintiff’s action or inaction.

After pleading were ordered, filed and exchanged, hearing in the suit commenced in earnest. As plaintiff, the present respondent testified on his own behalf without calling any witness. He also tendered several documentary exhibits to prove his claims and in defence of the defendant’s/appellants counter claim. On its part, the defendant/appellant called three witnesses in defence of plaintiff s claims and to establish or support its counter claim. At the end of the hearing of the suit, the lower court found in favour of the respondent after holding that he proved his claims on the preponderance of evidence and thereby entered judgment in his favour as claimed. The lower court also dismissed the defendant’s/appellant’s counter claim. Being dissatisfied with the judgment, the defendant appealed to this court. To that effect, it filed a Notice and Grounds of Appeal dated 26th of February 2009 containing twelve grounds of appeal.

In compliance with the rules and practice applicable in this Court, parties filed and exchanged their briefs of Argument. The appellant in its brief of argument dated 2nd October 2009 distilled three issues for determination of the appeal from the twelve grounds of appeal filed including the omnibus ground of appeal. The said issues for determination are reproduced hereunder:-

“1. In the absence of requisite pleadings particulars and prove of delivery or “services on the appellant”, whether the Respondent’s purported Bill of Charges satisfied the mandatory provisions of Section 16(2) of the Legal Practitioners Act, as to entitle him to judgment. (Ground 1)

2. Whether the aggregate lump judgment award of N19 Million is legally sustainable on the unparticularized Pleadings and evidence adduced by the Respondent, be it for concluded litigation briefs or on the basis of quantum meruit for the unconcluded briefs (Grounds 3, 4, 5, 8)
3. Whether the award of interest on the bases of CBN guidelines or at all is sustainable on the pleadings evidence presented by Respondent (Ground 2)

It is pertinent to state here, that the appellant had also filed Appellant’s Reply Brief of Argument dated 30th November 2009 but filed on 7/12/2009. I will later address it in the course of my treatment of the appeal.

The respondent on the other hand, filed his Brief of Argument dated and filed on 16/10/2009. Therein, three issues for determination of the appeal were formulated which read thus:-

(i) Whether or not the Appellant justifiably complain of non-compliance with the provisions of Section 16 (2) of the Legal Practitioner Act by the Respondent, inspite of the overwhelming evidence to the contrary, in order to escape its obligation to the Respondent.

(ii) Whether or not the Respondent’s 33 Bills of Charges are in compliance with the guidelines by the Supreme Court in OYEKANMI V. NEPA (2000) 15 NWLR (Pt 690) 414.

(iii) Whether or not the award of interest was justified on the basis of the Respondent’s pleadings/evidence and relevant judicial authorities on interest claim.