New Age Beverage Company Limited V. Mrs Abiola Aramide (2014)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

NONYEREM OKORONKWO, J.C.A.(Delivering the Leading Judgment)

The appeal in this case, arose from the judgment of Hon. Justice F.I. Oyelaran of the Oyo State High Court delivered at Ibadan on 6th December, 2012.

The brief facts of the case leading to the appeal are as follows:-

The appellant – New Age Beverage Company Ltd, in the course of its business, engaged one Mrs. Abiola Odeyemi to procure sugar for its use in its manufacturing business.

The said Mrs. Abiola Odeyemi procured some quantity of sugar from the respondent and paid for the supply.

Subsequently, the respondent insisted on direct payment of supplies made to the appellant by the issuance of cheques direct to the respondent and in consequence, further supplies procured from the respondent by the same Mr Abiola Odeyemi were paid for by cheques issued in favour of the respondent and no longer Mrs. Abiola Odeyemi.

Between December 2009 and January 2010 the appellant requested for and was supplied with 700 bags of sugar by the respondent at the rate of N8,200.00 per bag amounting to N5,740,000.00 (Five Million, seven hundred and forty thousand Naira only). Of the amount, the appellant issued three cheques in payments totally N3,900,000.00 (Three million nine hundred thousand naira only i.e. Exhibit D5, D6 and D7 in the Proceedings to the respondent leaving an outstanding sum of N1,840,000.00 (One million eight hundred and forty thousand Naira)

When the outstanding balance was not paid as expected, the respondent through her solicitors wrote the appellant demanding payment for the sum outstanding. The appellant did not respond to the letter which prompted the respondent to sue the appellant at the Oyo State High Court at Ibadan.

In court, the appellant contended that although it had issued some cheques in favour of the respondent, it (appellant) has no contractual relationship or privity with the respondent and that it had paid the aforesaid Mrs. Abiola Odeyemi the outstanding balance.

The High Court per F.I. Oyelaran (Judge) gave judgment in favour of the respondent adjudging the appellant liable to pay the sum of N1,840,000.00 as claimed.

It is against this order that the appellant has appealed to this court as per Notice of Appeal which raised five grounds which (shorn of Prolix Particulars) are as follows:-

1. “The trial judge erred both in law and facts adduced before her by holding that there is a contractual relationship between the claimant and the defendant.
2. “The trial Judge erred in fact when she held that the payments of money through Exhibit D5, D6, D7 in January, 2010 by the defendant only go to show that the defendant paid for the goods supplied in Exhibit P1 – P4.”
3. “The learned trial Judge erred in law when she admitted and relied on P3 & P4 in arriving at her decision.”
4. “The learned Judge erred in law and thus misdirected herself when she held that the failure of the defence witness who earlier said he could produce the Local purchase order but was unable to produce same should be resolved against the defendant.”
5. The learned Judge erred in fact and misdirected herself by holding that “if the total sum in Exhibit D5, D6 and D7 which adds to N3,900.00 (Three million, nine hundred thousand Naira) is deducted from the sum in Exhibit P4, the outstanding balance is N1,840,000.00 (One million eight hundred and forty thousand naira) would remain unpaid by the defendant.”

From the grounds of appeal, the appellant formulated the following five issues for determination viz-

Issue No. 1

“Whether from the facts and evidence led by the parties at the trial, there existed contractual relations capable of giving rise to binding right and obligation, liabilities or privileges between the appellant and respondent.”