Shell Petroleum Development V. Prince Ogan Mafimisebi & Ors. (2010)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

OYEBISI F. OMOLEYE, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

This is an appeal from the judgment of the Federal High Court sitting in Akure per A. Abdu-Kafarati, delivered on 15th November, 2002.

The brief background facts of this matter according to the Respondents herein who were plaintiffs at the lower Court are that, the Respondents who are fishermen, farmers and fish pond owners on 28th August, 1998, found their aquatic, and ecological environment covered and polluted by oil due to manifold spillage emanating from the Opuama Flow Station of the Appellant company. As a result of the oil spillage, there was pollution and destruction of fish farms, fishing equipment, waterways, rivers, atlantic coastal line, livestock and vegetation. In this regard, the Respondents caused a valuation exercise to be carried out which valuation was duly documented. The Respondents through their traditional head, the Olugbo of Ilaje land and Ondo State Environmental Protection Agency lodged a complaint of the incident with the Appellant.

The Appellant responded by organizing a joint investigation visit, (JIV) comprising of representatives of Opuama Agency, Tsekelewu Communities, Department of Petroleum Resources, the Nigeria Police and other experts who visited the affected area on 1st September, 1998 to ascertain the cause of the spillage and the extent of the damage. The report of the JIV is that, the spillage was as a result of acts of vandalisation by some unknown persons. Hence, the Appellant refused to pay any compensation to the Respondents. Therefore, the Respondents instituted an action against the Appellant at the lower Court vide their Writ of summons and claimed against the Appellant as follows:

The sum of one billion, two hundred and ninety-six million seven hundred and ten thousand naira (N1,296,710,000.00) special and general damages for damage suffered by the plaintiffs by reason of the 28th day of August, 1998 manifold oil spillage caused by the leakage in the defendant’s pipeline enroute Opuama which has a devastating spread to some communities in Ilaje Local Government resulting in destruction of aquatic, ecological and commercial lives of the plaintiffs as quantified in the plaintiffs’ valuation report. The defendant having neglected, failed and refused to negotiate and or pay adequate and reasonable compensation nor clean up the affected environment despite repeated demands.

The parties filed and exchanged pleadings and the case went to trial. The Respondents in a bid to establish their claims called two witnesses and tendered in evidence one Exhibit marked “Exhibit 1”. The Appellant learned four Witnesses and tendered eighteen exhibits, marked Exhibits 2, 2A15, 3 and 4. During trial, the Respondents withdrew the second limb of their claim, that is, general damages in the sum of five hundred thousand Naira (N500,000), see the statement of claim at page 25 of the record of appeal. The said claim for general damages was struck out accordingly.

The learned trial Judge in his considered judgment found that the Appellant was negligent for the oil spillage which emanated from the Opuama manifold, a facility owned by it. And that the spillage caused damage to the Respondents. However, the learned trial Judge held that the Respondents did not prove the first limb of their claim for special damages. He went ahead to award the sum of forty million two hundred thousand Naira (N40,200,000) general damages in favour of the Respondents against the Appellant.

The Appellant displeased with the judgment of the lower Court filed an appeal against it to this Court. The notice and grounds of appeal dated 20th November, 2002 filed on the same day contains five grounds of appeal. These are contained in pages 141 to 143 of the record of appeal. Briefs of argument were field and exchanged by the parties’ learned counsel.

In the brief of argument prepared for the Appellant which was deemed properly filed and served on 26th September, 2006, two issues were distilled from the five grounds of appeal for determination. These state thus:

(1) Whether the award of the sum of forty million two hundred thousand Naira (N40,200,000) as general damages by the trial Court was justified in law?

(2) Whether the trial Judge properly evaluated the evidence before him?

On the other hand, the Respondents’ learned counsel, in the Respondents’ brief of argument which was deemed properly filed and served on 22nd October, 2007, formulated three issues for the determination of the appeal.

These are as follows:

(1) Was the award of the sum of forty million two hundred thousand Naira (N40,200,000) as general damages not justified in law having regard to the trial Judge’s finding of fact of negligence against the Appellant and resultant injuries to the Respondents?