Bellview Airlines Limited V. Aluminium City Limited (2007)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

ISA AYO SALAMI, J.C.A.

The synopsis of the genesis of the case is that the appellant and the respondent entered into an agreement on 30th January, 1998 by which the respondent as claimant was to execute works in respect of fast wall partitioning and fixing of suspended ceiling on the first-fifth floors of the appellant’s structure.

The contract includes an arbitration clause whereby disputes between the parties touching upon the contract shall be referred to an arbitration, if the parties are unable to reach an amicable settlement.

It was also agreed that the respondent should commence work on the 3rd January, 1998 and complete same on or about the 31st March, 1998 at a, cost of N10,600,000. There was subsequently a variation to the scope of the original contract by the inclusion of purchase and installation of carpets which increased the contract sum to N11,236,700.00

A firm of architects, Archiscope Limited, was appointed at the instance of the appellant to supervise the work in accordance with the provisions of clause 8.4 of the contract.

A dispute subsequently arose between the parties and was referred for arbitration by the arbitral proceedings instituted by the respondent claiming the following reliefs against the appellant.

“1. Payment of the sum of N3,928,535.00 (three million, nine five naira) being outstanding debt owed the claimant by the hundred and twenty-eight thousand, five hundred and thirty-Respondent on account of services rendered and products sold to the respondent.

2. Interest on the sum of N3,928,535 (three million, nine hundred and twenty eight thousand five hundred and thirty-five naira) claimed in sub-paragraph 1 above calculated at the rate of 22.5% per annum with effect from the 1st day of January, 1999 until the satisfaction or payment of the entire sum to the claimant.
3. Refund of the sum of money paid by the claimant as professional fee and expenses in this Arbitration to the Arbitrator.
4. Such further awards or orders as the arbitrator may deem fit to make in the circumstances.”

The respondent denied that the claimant was entitled to any monies contending that the claimant failed to satisfactorily nor quantitatively complete the works inline with their mutual agreement.

The arbitrator ordered pleadings and directed that witnesses be called in support of the various assertions or contentions, upon conclusion of the evidence adduced by the witnesses, the arbitrator with the concurrence of parties formulated a single issue and proceeded to trial.

Thereafter the arbitrator considered the testimony of the witnesses, the documents produced at the proceedings along with the written submissions of the respective learned counsel in the light of the sole issue and published the award.

The applicant before the court below was the respondent in the arbitral proceedings and its application was for the following –

“1. An order setting aside the Arbitration Award given in favour of the Respondent by Adedoyin Rhodes – Vivour (Mrs.)- Arbitrator delivered on the 7th day of February, 2004.

An order staying execution of the Arbitration Award given in favour of the Respondent by Adedoyin Rhodes – Vivour (Mrs.), Arbitrator delivered on the 9th day of February, 2004.

3. And for such further order or other orders as this Honourable Court may deem fit to make in the circumstances.”

The grounds upon which the application was brought as stated therein are as follows –