Keystone Bank Limited V. Marketing and Media Limited (2016)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

ABIMBOLA OSARUGUE OBASEKI-ADEJUMO,J.C.A. 

The Appellant filed this appeal against the judgment of K. A. JOSE, (Mrs.) J., of the Lagos State High Court Lagos delivered on 2nd May, 2012.

The suit in the lower Court was commenced by a Writ of Summons and Statement of Claim dated 6th May, 2009.
“i. The sum of N20,000,000.00 (Twenty Million Naira) as damages for breach of contract.
ii. The sum of N10,000.000.00 (Ten Million Naira) as damages for loss of use of money at the said time.
iii. 21% interest on the money in the Claimant’s account from October, 2008 until same is paid.
iv. A declaration that the deduction of N869,541.25 from the Claimant’s account without its consent is unauthorized, is illegal.
v. N1,000.000.00 (One Million Naira) being cost of this litigation.”

The contention in this matter was that Respondent operated an account Number 1501000036 with Appellant’s Bode Thomas Branch, Surulere for the purpose of its business and had a credit of N8,000.000.00 (Eight Million Naira) in its accounts. The Appellant refused to honour cheques’ claim by claimant

1

and placed a restriction on the said account while it deducted sums of N869,541,24.00 from the account without Respondent’s authority or consent.

At the conclusion of the trial, judgment was entered in favour of the Respondent. The Appellant dissatisfied filed the notice of Appeal dated 23rd July, 2012 against part of the judgment of the lower Court.

The Appellant filed its Brief of Argument dated 20th November, 2013 filed 29th November, 2013. Same was settled by Kunle Ayorinde, Esq. of Layonu & Co. together with its Reply Brief of Argument filed and dated 21st May, 2015.

The Respondent’s Brief of Argument is dated and filed 27th February, 2014 and same was settled by Ademola Ekundayo Esq., Ayodele Osanyinlusi of Hill City Associates.

Appellant formulated 3 issues for determination thus:
1. “Whether the learned trial judge was right in law to hold that the Appellant was a busy body by the filing of Exhibit “D3”, that is, the Interpleader application dated 4th December, 2008 at Federal High Court in Suit No: FHC/L/CS/5391/2008 between Marketing and Media Limited & 3 Ors. v. Theodore Okwu Ejike & 4 Ors. when there

2

were clear provisions for the said procedure in Order 29 Rules 3(1), 4(a), (b) and (c) of the Federal High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules 2000, the applicable Rules of Court at the material time? (Distilled from Ground 1).
2. Whether the learned trial Judge was right to hold that the Appellant was in breach of its contractual obligation to the Respondent because there was enough funds in the Respondent’s account when Exhibits “P1”, “P2” and “P3″ were issued on 26th November, 2008, 28th November 2008 and 18th February, 2009 respectively and the said instruments were not honoured on presentation? (Distilled from Ground 2)
3. Whether the learned trial Judge was right to have found for the Respondent on the reliefs granted based on the oral and documentary evidence before the lower Court? (Distilled from Ground 3).”

The Respondent on the other hand adopted the issues formulated by the Appellant. Therefore these issues shall be the issues for determination in this appeal. I shall resolve issues 1 and 2 together.

ISSUE 1 AND 2
On the first issue, Appellant’s counsel submitted that there was no dispute on the action filed at the Federal