Spring Bank Plc V. Dokkin Ventures Nigeria Limited (2012)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

RITA NOSAKARE PEMU, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

This is an appeal against the final Judgment of Honourable Justice A. A. Phillips of the High Court of Lagos State delivered on the 11th of June, 2009, wherein, as reflected at pages 486-487 of the Record of Appeal, judgment was given in favour of the Claimant (Respondent in this appeal) against the Defendant (Appellant in this Appeal).

The action, subject matter of this appeal was commenced, after pre-trial conference formalities, by Amended Writ of Summons dated 17th October, 2006 – shown on page 280-281 of the Record of Appeal.

In it, the Claimant claims the following against the Defendant viz:-

“An order that the Defendant illegally and unlawfully retained the sum of US$871,595.04 being foreign exchange allocated to and purchased on behalf of the Claimant by the Defendant and which sum of money the Claimant fully paid the naira value to the Defendant.”

2. “An order that the Claimant, are entitled to, and that the Defendant should pay to Claimant the sum of US$871,595.04 being foreign exchange allocated to and purchased on behalf of the Claimant by the Defendant and which sum of money the Claimant fully paid the naira value to the Defendant.”
3. “An order that the Claimant is entitled to and that the Defendant should pay to the Claimant the sum of N8,458,000.00 being total costs of legal fees, consultancy fees, hotel, travel and other incidental expenses incurred by the Claimant in the pursuant of the Claimant’s claims as stated herein.”
4. An order that the Claimant is entitled to and that the Defendant pay to the Claimant general damages in the sum of N40,000,000.00 for the negligence, failure and refusals of the Defendant to settle the Claimant and in the alternative, as a result of the Defendant’s breach of the Banker/Customer relationship existing between the Claimant and the Defendant at all material times.”
5. An order that the Defendant pay to the Claimant interest on all the above mentioned sums at the rate of 21% per annum from 17th of December, 1993 till final judgment is delivered in this case and thereafter at the rate of 7% per annum until the entire Judgment debt and cost are liquidated.” – Pages 289-291 of the Record of Appeal.

At the close of pre-trial conference, the matter proceeded to trial. At the conclusion of trial, the parties filed their respective written addresses, after which the lower court adjudged, as reflected at page s 486-487 Vol. II of the Record of Appeal, the Respondent as victor.

SYNOPSIS OF THE FACTS, as gleaned from the respective parties –

The Respondent opened an account with the Appellant’s bank in 1993, pursuant to an agreement between them, as to the use of the Respondent’s fund which were deposited with the Appellant’s bank. This fact was confirmed by the Appellant in Exhibit C1 which is Appellant’s letter of 6th August, 1993.

The Appellant, subsequently opened a letter of credit on the instruction of the Respondent, in favour of Messrs Kamar B.V. of Netherlands, for the supply of equipment to facilitate the Respondent’s contract with the now defunct OMPADEC. When the suppliers were tarrying, the Respondent, through Exhibit C3 instructed the Appellant to cancel the Letter of Credit and further instructed the Appellant, to refund the foreign exchange used in purchasing the Letters of Credit into the Respondent’s account.

The cancellation of the Letter of Credit, was still within the 90 days maturity period of the Letter of Credit.

The reason for the request for refund of the foreign exchange, was to enable the Respondent use the foreign exchange, to process another Letter of Credit transaction with another supplier.

The Appellant did not carry out the request

The Appellant had said that the foreign exchange used for the now cancelled Letter of Credit was returned to the Appellant’s pool. The Respondent needed to make use of the foreign exchange not used for the cancelled letter of credit, and asked for it, but surprisingly Appellant would not produce same. The Respondent then asked to see its Statement of Account with the Appellant.

No Statement of Account was furnished Respondent, since 1993 when the account was opened in his favour, until September 1995. The statement of account is Exhibit C14B. When the Respondent saw it, he disagreed with its content.