md←→ previous / next
Before Their Lordships
IBRAHIM TANKO MUHAMMAD Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria
OLUKAYODE ARIWOOLA Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria
KUMAI BAYANG AKA’AHS Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria
AMINA ADAMU AUGIE Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria
PAUL ADAMU GALINJE Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria
OLUKAYODE ARIWOOLA Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria
KUMAI BAYANG AKA’AHS Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria
AMINA ADAMU AUGIE Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria
PAUL ADAMU GALINJE Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria
Between
TSKJ NIGERIA LIMITED –Appellant
AND
OTOCHEM NIGERIA LIMITED- Respondent
…………………….A…………………….
IBRAHIM TANKO MUHAMMAD, J.S.C. (Delivering the Leading Judgment): The respondent herein, was the plaintiff at the High Court of Rivers State (trial Court). It is an incorporated limited liability Company which carries on the business of marine construction and equipment leasing.
The appellant herein, was the defendant at the trial Court. It is a limited liability company. It was the case of the respondent at the trial Court that sometime in February, 1997; it entered into a contract with the appellant for the supply of a houseboat for the temporary use of its staff. It was allegedly agreed that the appellant would make an advance payment of N6,288,000.00 representing the rental value at the rate of N100,000 per day for two months as well as the cost of transporting the houseboat from Warri to Bonny. Certain modifications were also to be made to the boat before delivery. It was contended that the terms and conditions of the contract were spelt out in a Local Purchase Order (LPO) issued by the appellant to the respondent.
It was the respondent’s case before the trial Court that after the houseboat was delivered, the appellant requested that it be upgraded to European executive standard. Pursuant to this request the respondent alleged that it carried out further modifications to the boat at a cost of N12m. Upon completion of the modifications however, the appellant refused and/or neglected to settle the respondent’s bill. The respondent contended that the houseboat remained in the appellant’s possession for a period of 148 days before it was forced to retake possession thereof.
The appellant on the other hand, denied the respondent’s claims and contended that it did not take delivery of the houseboat because the respondent failed to meet the delivery deadline and also because it did not meet the required standard.
The respondent consequently instituted an action before the High Court of Rivers State, Port Harcourt Division. In its writ of summons at pages 1 – 3 of the printed record it sought the following reliefs against the appellant:
“a) N14,800,000.00 (Fourteen Million, Eight Hundred Thousand Naira only) representing hire rentals for 148 days (26th March, 1997 – 20th August 1997 inclusive).
b) N12, 000,000.00 (Twelve Million Naira Only) special damages.
(c) N40, 000,000.00 (Forty Million Naira only) general damages.”
At the conclusion of the trial, the learned trial judge entered judgment in favour of the plaintiff/respondent herein as follows:
1. The special damages for the sum of N12,000,000.00.
2. The sum of N6,288,000.00 which was the money the defendant ought to have paid in advance before or at the delivery of the boat.
3. Daily hire for 2 months and 28 days on invoice No. 0072 for the sum of N8, 800,000.00.”
On the whole, judgment was entered for the plaintiff for a total sum of N32,088,000.00. The plaintiff was also entitled to costs which was assessed and fixed at N3,000.00 (Three Thousand Naira).
The appellant was dissatisfied with the judgment. He appealed to the Court below.
The Court below allowed the appeal in part. It set aside that part of the trial Court’s judgment awarding the sum of N12m to the respondent as special damages.
Dissatisfied further, the appellant filed its appeal to this Court. Learned counsel for the respective parties settled briefs of argument.
Learned counsel for the appellant set out the following issues for determination:
“3.1.1 Whether the High Court of Rivers State has the requisite jurisdiction to entertain the suit number PHC/1414/98 (Ground One of the Amended Notice of Appeal)
3.1.2 Whether the Court of Appeal properly considered and evaluated the evidence adduced in the case before reaching the conclusion that there was a valid and enforceable contract between the parties? (Grounds two and three of the Notice of Appeal).
3.1.3 Whether the Court of Appeal was right to have held that the respondent was entitled to the sum of N6, 288,000,00 being the money that the respondent ought to have been paid in advance before or at the delivery of the houseboat?
(Ground four of the Notice of Appeal)”
Learned counsel for the respondent set out the following two issues for determination:
“Whether a claim strictly for payment of accrued hire rentals of a houseboat and general damages for breach of the
It was the respondent’s case before the trial Court that after the houseboat was delivered, the appellant requested that it be upgraded to European executive standard. Pursuant to this request the respondent alleged that it carried out further modifications to the boat at a cost of N12m. Upon completion of the modifications however, the appellant refused and/or neglected to settle the respondent’s bill. The respondent contended that the houseboat remained in the appellant’s possession for a period of 148 days before it was forced to retake possession thereof.
The appellant on the other hand, denied the respondent’s claims and contended that it did not take delivery of the houseboat because the respondent failed to meet the delivery deadline and also because it did not meet the required standard.
The respondent consequently instituted an action before the High Court of Rivers State, Port Harcourt Division. In its writ of summons at pages 1 – 3 of the printed record it sought the following reliefs against the appellant:
“a) N14,800,000.00 (Fourteen Million, Eight Hundred Thousand Naira only) representing hire rentals for 148 days (26th March, 1997 – 20th August 1997 inclusive).
b) N12, 000,000.00 (Twelve Million Naira Only) special damages.
(c) N40, 000,000.00 (Forty Million Naira only) general damages.”
At the conclusion of the trial, the learned trial judge entered judgment in favour of the plaintiff/respondent herein as follows:
1. The special damages for the sum of N12,000,000.00.
2. The sum of N6,288,000.00 which was the money the defendant ought to have paid in advance before or at the delivery of the boat.
3. Daily hire for 2 months and 28 days on invoice No. 0072 for the sum of N8, 800,000.00.”
On the whole, judgment was entered for the plaintiff for a total sum of N32,088,000.00. The plaintiff was also entitled to costs which was assessed and fixed at N3,000.00 (Three Thousand Naira).
The appellant was dissatisfied with the judgment. He appealed to the Court below.
The Court below allowed the appeal in part. It set aside that part of the trial Court’s judgment awarding the sum of N12m to the respondent as special damages.
Dissatisfied further, the appellant filed its appeal to this Court. Learned counsel for the respective parties settled briefs of argument.
Learned counsel for the appellant set out the following issues for determination:
“3.1.1 Whether the High Court of Rivers State has the requisite jurisdiction to entertain the suit number PHC/1414/98 (Ground One of the Amended Notice of Appeal)
3.1.2 Whether the Court of Appeal properly considered and evaluated the evidence adduced in the case before reaching the conclusion that there was a valid and enforceable contract between the parties? (Grounds two and three of the Notice of Appeal).
3.1.3 Whether the Court of Appeal was right to have held that the respondent was entitled to the sum of N6, 288,000,00 being the money that the respondent ought to have been paid in advance before or at the delivery of the houseboat?
(Ground four of the Notice of Appeal)”
Learned counsel for the respondent set out the following two issues for determination:
“Whether a claim strictly for payment of accrued hire rentals of a houseboat and general damages for breach of the
…………………….B…………………….
Continue reading TSKJ NIGERIA LIMITED v. OTOCHEM NIGERIA LIMITED
You have read the opening. Unlock the full library once and it stays unlocked - one payment, no subscription, the same library as the app.
- All 725 Laws of the Federation, A to Z
- 916 full judgments and 269 case collections
- 8,046 legal principles and 124 rules of court
- 343 drafts, with the Draft Builder
- The Law Dictionary - 31,442 terms
- Law School notes and 2,082 MCQs
Every Act, case collection and principle beginning with A, B or C is free to read in full, without unlocking - the same boundary as the Android app.