Joseph Sammy And Sons Limited V. Friday Agbonlahor (2011)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

GEORGE OLADEINDE SHOREMI. J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

This is an appeal against the judgment of the High Court sitting in Warri Judicial Division Delta State of Nigeria where the learned trial Judge gave Judgment in favour of the plaintiff. The said Judgment was delivered on 13th May, 1997. It is on pages 33 – 43 of the Records of Proceedings.

The Respondent as Plaintiff claimed in the trial court as follows:-

(i) The said sum of N137.520.00 being the balance of money owed by the Defendant to the Plaintiff in respect of the spare parts supplied By the Plaintiff to the Defendant between the months of October, 1993 and January, 1994.

(ii) Interest at the prevailing bank rate from January, 1994 until judgment is given.

(iii) Other suitable reliefs”

The facts of the case are:

“The Appellant who at all times material to the filing of the Writ of Summons against it, was engaged in the business of marine transportation and had a contractual arrangement with the Respondent, a dealer on Marine Spare Parts, to supply spare Parts needed by the Appellant for use in repairs and/or maintenance service of its Tug Boats/Barges. It was mutually agreed to by the Appellant evidenced in invoices prepared and signed by the parties and which were to be submitted to the Lagos office of the Appellant for payment after scrutiny and confirmation of prices and items of spare parts supplied.

However, in the course of the transaction between October 1993 and January 1994, items/spare parts supplied to the Appellant by the Respondent covered by 14 Invoice were Presented for payment at the Lagos office of the Appellant. The officer of the Appellant observed price differentials in the Invoices and confronted the respondent undertook a price review/reconciliation of the items/spare parts which was/were reflected in Red ink on the invoices and the agreed sum paid over to the Respondent.

After the Respondent had been fully paid the agreed sum covered in the subject invoices, he made a complete U-Turn and sued the Appellant for the sum claimed in the Writ of Summons contending that “the Appellant chose to pay him” what it wanted.

Pleadings were filed an exchanged the case proceeded on trial. At the trial the Respondent testified and tendered Exhibits A1 – A13, B1 – B13, C and D but called no witness. Two staff of the Appellant to wit, DW1 and DW2 testified and tendered Exhibits E1-813. At the close of the case, Counsel for the parties addressed the Court. The main thrust of the Counsel for the appellant’s contention was that since payment for the goods supplied was subject to approval of the Lagos Office of the appellant after scrutiny and confirmation, as given in evidence and partly admitted by the Respondent and the full sum was paid after a price Review/reconciliation by the parties had been made, the Respondent was not entitled to the reliefs sought. On the contrary, the Respondent contended that the transaction was conclusive upon acceptance of the spare parts by the Appellant’s officers in Warri who received and used the spare parts also in Warri, the Lagos office of the Appellant had nothing more to do than to pay the prices covered in the subject invoices.

On the part of the Appellant the following paragraphs of the statement of Defences are relevant and are reproduced thus:-

“2. Paragraph 9 of the Plaintiff s statement of claim is admitted only to the extent that some goods or items were supplied by the Plaintiff to the Defendant, but states that the invoices prepared by the Plaintiff were subject to scrutiny by the Defendant’s authorized officers in Lagos office and after such scrutiny and confirmation, the Defendant pays the agreed sum of money without delay.

3. In answer to paragraph s 6, 8, 10 and 14 of the Plaintiffs statement of claim, the Defendant avers that it is/was the practice and of course, the mutual understanding reached between the Plaintiffs and Defendant that the Plaintiff could supply spare parts to the Defendant’s workers at Warri and submit the invoices to the Defendant’s Lagos office for payment after due inspection of invoices and delivery notes issued and signed by the Plaintiff and Defendant’s officers.
4. In further answer thereto, when the Plaintiff called at the Defendant’s Lagos office for payment and presented the invoices, subject matter of this Suit, the Defendant discovered price differentials and certain malpractices and confronted the Plaintiff with same. The Plaintiff and Defendant there and then agreed on an on-the-spot reconciliation/price review of the amounts covered by each invoice per item of spare parts. Consequently, a thorough reconciliation price review was made by the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s authorised officer, and the agreed sum due and payable by the Defendant was reflected in the various invoices in red ink and the Defendant paid the sum so agreed, with the Defendant’s stamp endorsing payment thereon.

The Plaintiff did not raise any objection as to the price review and the payments were made on mutual understanding and acceptance by the Parties.