Nicotes Services Limited V. Oji Lekwuwa (2009)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

MOHAMMED LAWAL GARBA, J.C.A.

The Respondent had commenced an action vide a writ of summons issued at the High Court of Rivers State Port Harcourt (to be called High Court after now) on the 24/6/99 against the Appellant claiming the sum of Twelve Million, Four Hundred and Forty Three Thousand, Four Hundred and Forty Eight Naira only (N12,443,448.00) as special and general damages for negligence resulting in the loss or damage to goods at the Onne Warf Port Harcourt. Pleadings were filed in the case and after trial, the High Court entered judgment in favour of the Respondent on the 20/1/2000 in the following terms:-

“1. N9,443,448.00 being the total value of the 17657 1b weight of the materials stolen.

2. N15,000.000 as fees paid by the plaintiff for the survey Report.
3. N2 Million for loss of anticipated profit.
4. N200,000.00 general damages making a total of N11,658,448.00. Interest at the rate of 21% until date of judgment and thereafter at 10% per annum until the satisfaction the judgment debt.”

Not satisfied with the above decision, the Appellant caused a Notice of Appeal dated the 2/2/02 to be filed with the leave of the court, against it. The appeal was premised on the following two (2) grounds, devoid of the particulars:-

“(1) ERROR IN LAW

The Learned Trial High Court had no jurisdiction to entertain Respondent’s suit/claim in the Court below when the said suit/claim came within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Federal High Court.

(2) ERROR IN LAW

The Learned trial High Court erred in law when it awarded excessive damages namely, loss of anticipated profit, general damages and interests which said interests alone had amounted to N11,425,297.04 at the date of judgment in the suit without any basis in law thereby occasioning miscarriage of justice.”

Pursuant to the requirement of practice and procedure in this court, learned counsel for the parties affected by the appeal filed briefs of argument in support of their respective positions. The Appellants brief argument was filed on the 11/3/03 but deemed filed on the 13/10/05 while the Respondent’s brief was filed on the 1/11/05. The briefs of argument were adopted and relied on by learned counsel at the hearing of the appeal on the 15/6/09 as submissions in support of the points canvassed therein.

The learned counsel for the Appellant A. N. Muoma (Mrs.) had raised two (2) issues in the Appellants’ brief which she submitted for determination in the appeal. They are:-

(a) Whether the learned trial State High court had the jurisdiction to entertain the suit which arose out of maritime transactions and in an exclusive maritime zone of a Federal port complex.

(b) Whether the DAMAGES awarded to the Respondent in the court below for loss of anticipated profit, general damages and interest were excessive.”

Deacon N. Echefu, learned counsel who settled the Respondents’ brief reformulated the Appellants issue (a) slightly and adopted issue (b). The reformulated issue is thus:-

“(a) Whether the claim in this action falls within the admiralty jurisdiction on of the Federal high Court.”