Disable Preloader

CaseLaw

G.K.F. Inv. Nig. Ltd V. NITEL (2009) CLR 7(e)(SC)

Judgement delivered on July 3rd 2009

Brief

  • Issues for determination
  • Evaluation of evidence
  • Award of interest
  • Pleadings

Facts

This is an appeal against the decision of the Court of Appeal, Lagos Division, which affirmed the judgment of the Lagos State High Court in favour of the Appellant who was Plaintiff in the trial Court. The case of the Appellant as per its amended statement of claim was that it was allocated a telephone line No. 0012630142 formerly owned by Linx Collavino Nigeria, in April, 1996 on applying to the Respondent for one.

In September 1996 the telephone services were withdrawn by the Respondent, leaving the Appellant unable to communicate through the line. As a result of this development, the Appellant lodged a complaint to the Respondent, and the Appellant was informed that the withdraw al was necessitated by the non-payment of the sum of N23,655.00 which the Respondent charged the Plaintiff.

According to the Appellant it has already paid the said sum vide the Nigeria Arab Bank, and the bank remitted the money to Respondent on 23rd September 1996. Inspite of the payment the Respondent refused to restore the telephone services, even after several demands. The failure to restore the line has created hardship on the Appellant, to wit it claimed the following:-

  • a
    The sum of N30,000,000.00 (Thirty million naira) being special Exemplary and general damages from the Defendant for breach of the contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant by the Defendant or for negligence.
  • b
    Loss of income/profits at the rate of N500,000.00 per week.
  • c
    Interest on the above damages and loss of income/profit at the rate of 21% per annum from the 5th day of December 1996 till final payment, and 6% thereafter until liquidation."

The Defendant/Respondent denied most of the allegations. On completion of pleadings both parties adduced evidence. The trial Court appraised the evidence, and at the end of the day found for the Appellant and awarded damages which it was not satisfied with and therefore appealed to the lower Court, which dismissed the appeal. Again it is not satisfied with the judgment, and it has appealed to this Court.

Issues

  • 1.
    "Whether grounds 4, 6, 7, 8, 10 and 11 of the Appellant's notice of appeal...
    Read More