Attorney General of Lagos State V. Cattle Utilities and Services Limited (2002)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

 M. CHUKWUMA-ENEH, J.C.A

-ENEH, J.C.A

M. CHUKWUMA-ENEH, J.C.A (Delivered the Leading Judgment):In this appeal from the decision of Manuwa J. of the Lagos High Court, Ikeja Division the plaintiff (Respondent) claimed in the trial Court as follows:

1. A declaration that the Lagos State Government of any of its officers, servants or agents whomsoever have not right or power to employ force, threat of force or self-help in ejecting the plaintiff from the Oko-Oba Abattoir and lairage or in retaking possession of any of the equipments leased to the plaintiff in connection therewith save pursuant to an order of a court of competent
2. An order of injunction restraining the Lagos State Government from using or employing force, threat of force or self help in ejecting the Plaintiff from the said Oko-Oba Abattoir and Lairage or in retaking possession of any of the equipments leased to the Plaintiff by the Lagos State Government in connection therewith save pursuant to an order of a court of competent jurisdiction.
3. A declaration that the termination by the Lagos State Government of the deed of lease agreement dated the 20th May, 1998 and made between the Plaintiff and the said Government is null and void and of no legal consequence.
4. A declaration that the Plaintiff has not committed any breach of any of the covenants contained in the said deed of lease.
5. An injunction restraining the Lagos State Government or any of its officers, servants or agents whomsoever from (a) terminating or purporting to terminate the said lease agreement for alleged breach of any of the covenants contained therein without first serving on the Plaintiff a notice specifying the particular breach contained of as required by law or (b) taking any steps whatsoever and howsoever pursuant to the purported termination of the lease as aforementioned.
6. An order directing an inquiry into the amount of damages payable by the Lagos State Government to the plaintiff for breach of covenants contained in the lease agreement dated 20/5/98.

Dated this 12th day of August, 1999.”

At the hearing the plaintiff called one witness and the defendant (appellant) called two witnesses. Both counsel then submitted written addresses. Excepting as to relief 6, judgment was entered against the defendant (appellant) as claimed by the plaintiff (respondent). The crux of the matter in the Court below and in this appeal still is the appellant’s contention that the respondent are not entitled to manage, control or operate the Oke-Oba Abattoir and Lairage leased to it (i.e. plaintiff/appellant). The plaintiff (appellant) has stoutly contested that it was not in breach of the agreement between them on the said subject matter.

Dissatisfied with the decision the defendant (appellant) appealed to this Court and had filed a total of ten grounds of appeal. In its brief of argument filed in compliance with the Rules it formulated eight issues for determination and they are as follows:

“1. Whether the learned trial Judge breached the fundamental right of the appellant to fair hearing when he refused to adjourn the matter to enable the appellant’s counsel receive the Respondent’s written address and reply to the new issues and point of law raised therein (Additional Ground 1)

2. Whether the learned trial Judge was right to have granted the plaintiff/respondent’s application to amend the statement of claim at the judgment stage without notice to the appellant (Additional ground 2).
3. Whether the transaction or agreement between the parties is a lease of the Oko-Oba Abattoir complex and its facilities or a management contract of the complex. (Additional ground 3).
4. Whether having regard to the provisions of the agreement, intention to terminate can only be given in the event of an undisputed breach of a clause in the agreement (Ground A in the Notice of Appeal).
5. Whether the learned trial Judge was right to have relied upon the meat hygiene regulations made pursuant to Section 8 of the Meat Inspection Law Cap. 129 Laws of Lagos State 1994 in his judgment to invalidate clause 8(II) of the agreement (Additional ground 4).
6. Whether clause 8(II) of the agreement is rendered invalid and/or unenforceable by the meat hygiene regulations Cap 129 of Lagos State 1994. (Ground C of the Notice of Appeal).
7. Whether having regard to the nature of the issues placed before him the learned trial Judge properly directed himself as to the burden of proof. (Ground B of the Notice of Appeal).
8. Whether the learned trial Judge properly evaluated the evidence before him and was right in entering judgment for the plaintiff and dismissing the defendant’s counter claim (Ground D and Additional Ground No.5).”

The plaintiff (respondent) also filed a brief of argument in accordance with the Rules of this Court and adopted the issues for determination raised by the appellant.

To further dilate upon the facts of this matter I have decided to set out those facts not in dispute as per the averments contained in paragraphs 1,2,3,4,5,6(1), 9 and 12 of the Statement of Claim admitted by paragraph 1 of the Statement of Defence and they read as follows:

“1. The Plaintiff is a limited liability company incorporated in Nigeria and having its registered office at No. 50, Burma Road, Apapa, Lagos.

2. The defendant is sued as the representative of the Government of the Lagos State of Nigeria.
3. By a deed of Lease Agreement dated the 20th May, 1998 and made between the Lagos State Government as Lessor and the plaintiff herein as Lessee, the Lagos State Government leased the Oko-Oba Abbatoir and Lairage together with the Equipments and Facilities attached thereto or connected therewith for a term of five years commencing from the date of execution of the aid Lease Agreement i.e. 20th May, 1998. The plaintiff will rely upon and hereby pleads the said deed of Agreement.
4. Among the promises made by the lessee under the terms of the said Lease Agreement which formed part of the consideration were the follows:-

(i) to repair, operate and manage the said Abattoir;

(ii) to invest the sum of 20,000,000 in the rehabilitation and repair of the said Abattoir;

AND

(iii) to pay rent in the amount and at the times stipulation in the said Lease Agreement.