Emerald Garland Beverages Ltd. & Anor V. Dennis Chukwuemeka Maduechesi (2010)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

AMINA ADAMU AUGIE, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

The Respondent, engaged by the Appellants to handle various cases they had in Court. However, by a letter dated 26th July 2006, the Respondent was informed – “We have deemed it necessary to debrief you and your Chambers of all the cases that you are handling for us. For over 2 (two) years we have been going to Court and none of the cases Viz: – – -has come to a successful conclusion. We shall be informing you who the new lawyers would be thanks for your co-operation”.

In his reply dated 3rd August 2006, the Respondent withdrew his services, and after putting “the records straight”, concluded thus –

“..We hereby condemn vehemently your crude and malicious innuendo alluding to our Chambers as non-result oriented. It only takes a greedy man and an ingrate to conclude that we did not produce any result in the cases – – Result means different things to different people. A reasonable man would know that we have produced results in the case we have handled for you. – – In consideration of our legal services to you, we hereby demand you to pay us a total sum of N398,000.00 in cash or cheque to our Chambers within one month of this demand letter. You shall collect all your case files as soon as you pay us fully. However, we wish to remind you that your former counsel – – made an agreement with our Chambers over your outstanding debt – – to him. We hereby advice you to go and settle your indebtedness to Obi Ulasi, Esq. to the tune of N100, 000.00 being the balance of his professional fees which you owed him before we inherited your briefs from him. Please find attached in this letter a copy of our bill of charges for the legal services rendered to you during your retainer-ship with us- -.”

In another letter dated 16th April 2007, the Appellants were told –

“I wish to bring your attention to the Zenith Bank Cheques Nos. – – – representing the sum of N298,000.00, which you issued to Mr. Dennis Maduechesi – – on the 6th day of October 2006. I annex the cheques hereto. The aforementioned cheques after bring presented to the bank were returned unpaid. I need to remind you of the legal implications of your action. However, I demand the payment of the N298,000.00 within seven days from 16th April 2007. If you fail to heed to this demand I shall have no other alternative than to bring both criminal and civil proceedings against you”.

With no response from the Appellants, the Respondent instituted proceedings at the Onitsha High Court of Anambra State with a “Writ of Summons for Suits in Undefended List”. He also filed an “Application for Summary Judgment in accordance with Order 11 rules 1 & 5 (2) of High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules 2006″‘ and a 25-paragraph Affidavit, where he averred in paragraphs 22 to 24 –

22. That I strongly believe that the Respondents (Appellants herein) have no defence to this suit.

23.That it will be in the interest of justice to enter Judgment in my favour because a laborer is entitled to his wages.

24. That the Defendants are wealthy and can easily pay my outstanding fees.

The 2nd Appellant was served by substituted means, and the Appellants filed separate Statements of Defence. The 1st Appellant averred as follows in paragraph 6 – 10 of its own pleadings that –

6. Even by his admission, the Plaintiff concedes that the 1st Defendant has nothing to do with his claim in this matter, even the bill of charges bears out that the suit..was the 2nd Defendant’s personal case and has nothing to do with the 1st Defendant.
7. The 1st Defendant denies that any such letter of 16/4/2007 had been written to her in respect of the 2nd Defendant’s personal matter.
8. The 1st Defendant denies categorically that the Plaintiff is entitled to any of the reliefs he claims in paragraph, 15 (a) – (c), the 1st Defendant who is a limited liability company reiterates that suit No. O/432/2001 which is the crux of this matter was a personal suit undertaken by the 2nd Defendant with the Plaintiff, it has absolutely nothing to do with the 1st Defendant, the 1st Defendant therefore states she cannot be sued for a case in which she did not engage the legal services of the Plaintiff and which the same Plaintiff admits was only the 2nd Defendant’s personal matter.
9. The 1st Defendant shall contend that she is a legal entity distinct and or separate from the 2nd Defendant, even if the said 2nd Defendant be her managing Director, it makes no difference with regard to the separateness of the 1st Defendant and the 2nd Defendant.
10. The 1st Defendant shall as hereinbefore earlier on stated raise a preliminary point that the service of the originating processes on the 1st Defendant in this matter was incompetent and improper and for the reason(s0 set out hereunder –

(i) The processes were not delivered to any director, secretary, trustee or other senior, principal or responsible officer of the 1st Defendant nor were the processes left at her registered, principal, advertised office or place of business of the 1st defendant within jurisdiction, rather the same had been served on one Miss Cordelia Mbaegbu a sales girl in the 1st Defendant’s Onitsha office.

On his part, the 2nd Appellant averred as follows in his pleadings –

10. The 2nd Defendants states that contrary to the agreement of the parties that the N298,000.00 would only be paid to the Plaintiff if the 2nd Defendant obtained a favorable Judgment by end of March 2007, the 2nd Defendant had learnt that the Plaintiff had perfected plans to cash the cheque Judgment or no Judgment.

11.That he had been constrained to countermand payments on the cheques.

12.That till date Judgment has not been entered nor has the 2nd Defendant collected even a kobo of the sum of N4,540,000 00 which is the amount he claims in the aforesaid suit No O/432/2001.

13. That it beat the 2nd Defendant’s imagination that the Plaintiff will sue him for money, which is purely dependent on the happening of a contingency that also has not come to pass.
14. That the 2nd Defendant was only being more than fair to the Plaintiff – had agreed to pay him the N298,000.00 in the event that the Judgment be entered in his favour in the matter, for after all he had briefed another counsel to do the same and would still pay him in any event.
15. That the 2nd Defendant denies paragraph 15 of the Statement of Claim and shall at the trial urge the Court to hold that the Plaintiff is not entitled to the same.
16. The 2nd Defendant reiterates that he does not owe the plaintiff any kobo and challenges him to show at the trial that he has collected even a kobo of the N4,540,000.00 or that judgment has been entered in this favour in the matter.

At the end of the day, the lower Court found in favor of the Respondent in its Judgment delivered on the 28th of January 2008. However, it was only the 2nd Appellant that was ordered to pay the Respondent – “the sum of N298,000.00 representing his outstanding professional fees for legal services rendered and also the sum of N4, 000.00 being bank charges for the two Zenith Bank cheques returned”. The lower Court refused to grant the 5% on the Judgment asked – “as he is neither a money lender nor a bank”.