Dickson Friday Dickson & Anor. V. Nathaniel Moses Assamudo (2013)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

MOHAMMED LAWAL GARBA, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

By a writ of summons dated the 27/5/99 taken out of the Registry of the High Court of Akwa Ibom State at Eket, the Respondent had sued one Friday Dickson, (now deceased) and the two Appellants, his children, “for unlawful trespass and illegal acquisition of possession of the apartment occupied by the plaintiff without due legal process and seizure/damage of the plaintiff’s personal belongings”. It was further endorsed on the writ as follows:

“Wherefore the plaintiff claims against the defendants jointly and severally as follows:

N3 million as special and general damages for unlawful trespass, costs of property seized, damaged or exposed to heavy rains outside the apartment occupied by the plaintiff.”

Eventually, in an amended statement of claim dated 20/2/07 filed on the same date, after the death of the Appellant’s father, the Respondent had claimed as follows against the Appellants in paragraph 25:-

“25. WHEREFORE the plaintiff claims from the Defendants jointly and severally the sum of N5,000,000.00 (Five Million Naira) being aggravated general damages for trespass to chattels, unlawful ejection and damage to chattel belonging to the plaintiff.”

After trial of the case, the High Court in a judgment delivered on the 19/11/09, found for the Respondent and ordered the Appellants to jointly and severally pay him aggravated general damages in the sum of Three Million and Five Hundred Thousand Naira (N3,500,000.00).

This appeal is against that decision because the Appellants were not satisfied therewith. The notice of appeal was filed 5/2/2010 and it contained two (2) grounds of appeal. In the Appellants’ brief filed on the 10/8/2010 but deemed on 30/10/10, Mr. Livinus Udofia, Esq., learned counsel for the Appellant had raised two (2) issues for determination as follows:

“1. Whether the learned trial judge was right in finding and holding that the appellants were liable to pay damage to the plaintiff.

2.Whether the learned trial judge was not biased in evaluating the evidence adduce before him by the appellants.”

The Respondents brief was filed on the 18/4/12 but deemed on the 27/6/12 and the learned counsel for the Respondent, Mr. Chris O. Ezeibe, Esq., had formulated a sole issue therein, for decision in the appeal. It is thus:

“whether the trial learned Judge was right in entering judgment against the Appellants.”

Although the learned counsel for the Appellants did not indicate from which of the two (2) grounds of the appeal his issues were distilled, as required by diligent and established practice of brief writing, the issues can be said to be derivable from the two grounds of appeal. Perhaps I should point out that it would be merely simplistic to assume that because there two (2) grounds of appeal, the two (2) issues must necessarily have been derived from them.

I intend to use the Appellants’ issues in the determination of the appeal. At the hearing of the appeal on the 5/12/12, the briefs were adopted and relied on by the learned counsel for the parties as the submissions in support of their respective positions in the appeal.