Alh. Mustapha Isa V. C.G.C Nigeria Limited (2014)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

ABDU ABOKI, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

This is an appeal against the judgment of the Katsina State High Court of Justice delivered on 27th November, 2012 by S.A. Mahuta J.

The Appellant was the Plaintiff at the lower Court while the Respondent was the Defendant.

By the writ of summons dated 13th December, 2007 filed on 17/12/2007 in suit No. KTH/54/2007 the Appellant sued the defendant claiming the following reliefs;

a. “The difference between the amount expected and the amount paid by the defendant N32,446,507,30K

b. General damages N20,000,000.00k” (Underline mine)

Brief facts of the case leading to this appeal are as follows;

The defunct Petroleum Trust Fund (PTF) awarded a contract to the Respondent. The Respondent awarded a sub-contract to the Appellant to construct Eleven Residential Houses for Engineers representative at Sabke Dam, Irrigation and water supply project Daura, Katsina State.

The trial Court in its judgment held inter alia as follows;

“….It is therefore my considered but firm belief that the plaintiff had woefully failed to prove his claim against the defendant and same is hereby dismissed for lack of merit….”

It is against the above Judgment that the Appellant’s amended notice of appeal dated 7/3/2014 was filed and it contained 7 grounds of appeal.

The Appellant in accordance with the rules of this Court filed his brief of argument on 10/3/2014 containing 3 issues for determination of the appeal. They are adumbrated as follows;

1. Whether the Appellant claims rendering of service under an unenforceable contract, recover on the services rendered on a quantum meruit? Or whether work done or services rendered by the Appellant at the request of the Respondent and of which the Respondent has benefited; the Appellant can recover the value of the work done or services rendered on a quantum meruit.
2. Whether there is any evidence adduced by the Appellant to justify that the Appellant expended any amount of money to back up his claim?
3. Whether Exhibit 23 signifies the last payment in respect of the project?

Learned counsel to the Respondent in his brief of argument adopted the 3 issues formulated by the Appellant for the determination of this appeal. This appeal will therefore be determine on the three issues accordingly.

ISSUE ONE