United Bank for Africa Plc. V. Eye-gymineral Resources Ltd & Anor (2009)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

SIDI DAUDA BAGE, J.C.A.

This is an appeal against the decision of High Court of Justice Enugu State (the lower Court” for short) delivered on 28th July 2005 (Coram Udeh J). By their statement of claim the Respondents as Plaintiffs at the lower court, Instituted this action against the appellant then as defendant thereat, claiming against the defendant jointly and severally as follows:-

(i) The sum of Fifty million Naira (N50,000,000.00) as specific and general damages for injuries inflicted on the plaintiffs by the defendant when the defendant on 28-9-99 negligently and; or maliciously disobeyed the Instructions of the 1st Plaintiff on Cheque No. 000525451 and issued Bank Cheques instead of Bank Drafts for payment to NNPC at Makurdi.

(ii) Interest on the sum claimed at the rate of 21% from 1-11-99 until the final payment is made.

(iii) Cost of this action.

At the lower court the appellant, then respondent United Bank for Africa Plc, Enugu Main Branch. The respondents who are Plaintiffs at the lower court, the 151 plaintiff being Eye-Gym Mineral Resources Ltd, a Limited liability Company, and chief (Dr.) Ezeanowayi I. Nnuba the 2nd plaintiff the M.D. and C.E.O. of the 1st Plaintiff.

Briefly put, the facts of this case as could be gathered from the pleadings by the parties and the reliefs sought are that the 151 Plaintiff who is an Independent Petroleum Products Marketer has been a customer of the Defendant (now Appellant) at its Enugu Main Branch. The 2nd Plaintiff as Managing Director/Chief Executive Officer (C.E.O.) of the 1st Plaintiff on 28th September 1999, acting on the instruction of the Plaintiff, instructed the defendant to make out a bank draft in favour of Pipe line & Products Co. Ltd. (i.e. PPMC Ltd) Remittance Account and another bank draft in favour of Petroleum Equalization fund (Management Board) and that the two drafts should be made payable at Makurdi Branch in Benue State. The defendants did not comply with the Plaintiff instructions but instead prepared local cheques which can only be honoured within Enugu. The 2nd Plaintiff discovered the defendants non-compliance at Oturkpo after he had gone 3/4 (three quarter) of the journey to Makurdi. When the 2nd Plaintiff told the Manager of the defendant at Enugu of the anomaly, he asked him to go ahead and present the instruments to the beneficiaries promising to contact the Benue branch of the defendants Bank at Makurdi to honour the cheques from the beneficiaries. The cheques were dishonoured for immediate value which was a clear indication that the defendant failed to issue instructions to their Makurdi branch. Two witnesses were called by the plaintiffs and one witness for the defence. In the end, the learned trial judge entered judgment against the defendant in favour of the Plaintiffs for the sum of N7, 786,352.00 being specific and general damages for injuries inflicted on the Plaintiffs by the defendant. Also an Order for payment of interest of 5% per annum on the judgment sum from the date of judgment until the entire judgment sum is liquidated.

Dissatisfied with the judgment of the lower court dated 28th of July 2005, the defendant appealed to this Court vide his Notice of Appeal dated 28th of July, 2005.

Both parties have in compliance with the rules of this Court, filed their respective briefs of argument.

The appellants herein filed its brief of argument dated and filed the 14th of September 2007. The Respondents brief dated 14th May, 2008 was deemed field on 8th of October 2008. In the appellant’s brief, three Issues for determination were formulated.

The Issues are:-

(a) Did the Plaintiffs lead evidence to prove that the damages claimed were causally connected with failure by the defendant to issue bank drafts to the plaintiffs and that the damages are recognized by law (Grounds 1 & 3).

(b) Whether the Plaintiffs waived their right to sue in respect of non-Issuance of bank drafts in view of the agreement subsequently entered into between the parties to avoid loss or mitigate damage that the plaintiffs should pay in the bank cheques at Makurdi and that the instruments would be given immediate value upon presentation, just as bank drafts are treated, (Ground 2)

(c) Whether the plaintiffs proved that they were entitled to award of damages for psychological trauma and loss of good will (Ground 4).