Literamed Publications Limited V. Marie Akpenyi (2014)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

SIDI DAUDA BAGE, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

This is an appeal by the Appellant against the judgment of the Federal High Court in the Lagos Judicial Division before the Honourable Justice Dan Abutu, delivered on the 24th July, 2009.

The action was instituted in 2002 and Judgment delivered by the lower Court to be set aside on 24th July, 2009.

In the lower Court, the Plaintiff (the Respondent) claimed against the Defendant (the Appellant) for:

a) A Declaration that the removal of the Plaintiffs name from the new Edition by a letter dated 25th April, 2002 by Defendant is ultra vires her powers, unconstitutional, null and void.

b) A Declaration that the Plaintiff is still the owner of the New Edition of “FRENCH FOR BEGINNERS” and that she is entitled to have her full Royalty and share of profit as per the New Edition.

c) The sum of N50 Million (Fifty Million Naira) being Damages for Breach of contract by the Defendant and General Damages suffered by the Plaintiff as a result of loss of good will with other partners.

d) The sum of N50 Million Naira jointly and severally against the Defendant, being special Damages for Royalty years of 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001 and 2002 and other expenses incurred by the Plaintiff as at when the Union Bank Cheque was sent back to the Defendant.

e) Interest on the said sums of money mentioned in subparagraph e & d at the rate of 25% per annum from 1998 till the date of the Judgment and thereafter at the rate of 10% until full payment.

f) That all the accounts and records of the money realized during the sales of 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002 till date should be produced.

g) Total cost of this suit.

The reliefs or claims of the Respondent is at pages 9 – 10 of the record of appeal.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The Respondent is the authors of a book known as “FRENCH FOR BEGINNERS” which was later changed and reviewed and called Lantern Comprehensive French by the Appellant without the consent and authority of the Respondent.