Ahmadu Musa & Anor V. Anthony Ehidiamhen (1994)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

MUHAMMAD, J.C.A. 

By a writ of summons issued in the High Court of Borno State, Konduga Judicial Division holden in Maiduguri the plaintiff sued the defendants claiming for a declaration that the defendants are jointly and severally liable to the plaintiff for all damages suffered by the plaintiff as a result of an accident involving the plaintiff’s Peugeot Saloon car with registration No. BD 8118 JA and the second defendant’s MAN Diesel lorry with registration No. PL 218 J driven by the first defendant for and on behalf of the second defendant which said accident occurred on the 14th December 1987.

Pleadings were ordered, filed and exchanged. By paragraph 17 of the statement of claim the plaintiff claimed as follows:-

“(a) N61,000.00 (Sixty One Thousand Naira) being the pre-accident value of the plaintiff’s Peugeot 505 SR Saloon car with registration No. BD 8118 JA.

(b) As special damages the sum of N1,314,600.00 (One million three hundred and fourteen thousand, six hundred Naira) being the value of one Haemodialysis machinery; one sonicaid ultra sound machine, one passport, children’s clothes and drugs completely destroyed by fire as a result of the accident.

(c) Interest at the court rate of 10% per annum on the above total sum of N1,375,600.00 (One million three hundred and seventy five thousand six hundred Naira) with effect from the date of judgment until liquidation.”

The defendants filed a joint statement of defence. At the trial of the action evidence was led on both sides and after addresses by learned counsel for the parties, the learned trial judge in a reserved judgment found for the plaintiff. In her judgment the trial judge held as follows:-

“On the totality of the matter before the court it is my view that the plaintiff has proved his case as per his paragraph 17 of his statement of claim dated 16th August 1989 and that which should succeed.”

She then awarded the plaintiff the total sum of N1, 375,000.00 (One million three hundred and seventy thousand Naira) plus 10% interest with effect from the date of judgment until liquidation.

The defendants, who I shall henceforth refer to as the appellants, are dissatisfied with this decision. They appealed to this court upon twelve grounds of appeal. Pursuant to the Rules of this court, learned counsel for both appellants and the respondent filed and exchanged their respective briefs of argument. The appellants in their brief formulated issues for determination to wit:-

“(1) Whether having regard to the contents of Exhibit ‘F’ and the oral evidence adduced at the trial, G.B. Ollivant is a part of UAC (Nigeria) Ltd and not a separate entity.

(2) Whether the learned trial judge correctly applied the principles of estoppel and Section 148(d) of the Evidence Act to the evidence before the court.

(3) Whether the refusal of the application by the appellants to amend paragraphs 5 and 16 of the statement of defence as shown in paragraphs 5(a) and 16(a) of the amended statement of defence is justified and did not lead to a miscarriage of justice.

(4) Whether the evaluation of the evidence about the position of the plaintiff’s car at the time of the accident and the goods in the car is supportable and sustainable.”