Hyundai Motors Nigeria Limited V. Steve Ibanga & Partners (2014)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

JOSEPH JUDE JELLA, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

This is an appeal against the decision of the High Court of Akwa Ibom State, Uyo delivered on the 27th June, 2012 in Suit No. HU/350/2008, by which Judgment was entered in favour of the Respondent as Plaintiff, against the Appellant.

A resume of the facts leading to this case will serve a better understanding of the case.

The Respondents sued the Appellant for a declaration that the engine failure developed by the bus supplied to the Plaintiff/Respondent by the Defendant Appellant amounts to a breach of condition and warranty as to merchantable quality as advertised by the Defendant/Appellant and this entitles the plaintiff/Respondent to repudiate the contract and for an order directing the Defendant/Appellant to refund to the Plaintiff/Respondent the sum of six million eight hundred and ninety five thousand naira (N6,895,000.00) being the purchase price for the bus or to replace the bus with another in good condition.

In the judgment delivered on the 27th of June, 2012 by learned trial Judge Philomena Etim J. ordered the Defendant/Appellant to replace to the Plaintiff/Respondent a brand new Nyundai 29 Sector Super delux bus or its current financial equivalent in place of the one in custody of the defendants within one month from the date of the judgment. The defendants were also ordered to pay five million naira damages to the Plaintiffs.

Dissatisfied with the above judgment, the Defendant henceforth referred as the Appellant appealed to this Court vide a Notice of Appeal filed on the 23rd July, 2012 containing four Grounds of Appeal. An Amended Notice of Appeal of four grounds was filed on the 24th September, 2013 and deemed on the 22nd October, 2013. In his written brief, the Appellant distilled four issues for determination as follows:

1. Whether the Lower Court has jurisdiction to enter the Respondent’s case (Ground 1).
2. Whether the Respondent is entitled to declaration sought and a replacement of a brand new Hyundai 29 sector Super Delux Counter Bus or its financial equivalent (Ground 2).
3. Whether the Respondent is entitled to general damages in the sum of N5 million as award by the Learned trial Judge (Ground 3).
4. Whether the judgment of the learned trial Judge is against the weight of evidence (Ground 4).

In the Respondent’s brief filed on the 10th January, 2014 he adopted all the issues raised by the Appellant.

An Appellants reply was filed on the 21st February, 2014. All the briefs of argument were adopted by the various parties.

The 1st issue raised by learned counsel for the Appellant which borders on jurisdiction is that the learned trial Judge lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate in this matter because the Respondent purchased the 29 Sector Super Delux Hyundai country bus in Calabar at the Appellants branch office where he carries on business and that all necessary documentation were issued in Calabar. it is contended that the Respondent chose to commence action to enforce the warranty contract against the Appellant in Uyo.

In the Appellant’s view learned trial Judge lacks jurisdiction since the course of action arose in Calabar Cross River State and not Uyo. Reliance was place on section 6(6) of the 1999 Constitution as amended and Order 2 Rule 5 of High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules of Akwa Ibom State.

It is further submitted by Learned Counsel to the Appellant that the case before the learned trial Judge had nothing to do with delivery and non delivery of the bus, but that it relates to breach of contract of warranty entered into at the Appellants office and that performance can only take place in Calabar Cross River State.

He called in aid ANO LODGE HOTELS LTD VS. MERCANTILE BANK NIG. LTD (1993) 3 NWLR (PT 284) 721 @ 731 PARA E – F. It is then argued that there is nowhere in the writ of summons and statement of claim that states that the contract was contracted in Uyo, and so the Court cannot confer jurisdiction or vest itself with jurisdiction not conferred to it by the Constitution and the enabling statute.

Reliance was placed on NAIGE VS. CAPITAL BANKORP LTD (1999) 7 NWLR (PT 609) 71 @8 0. It is submitted that in WEMA BANK PLC VS. CHRISTOPHER LAB INT LTD (2002) 8 NWLR (PT 770) 614 @ 633 the court held that:

Where however a dispute arises as to which State High Court has jurisdiction in the matter, a reference to the Constitution is made to resolve the dispute”