CORAM
A.O. OBASEKI, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
A. NNAMANI, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
S.M.A. BELGORE, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
A.G.O. AGBAJE, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
A.B. WALI
PARTIES
ALHAJI NURUDEEN OLUFUNMISE
APPELLANTS
MRS. ABIOLA LABINJO FALANA
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
JUDGMENT GOT BY FRAUD – WHAT MUST BE PROVED TO HAVE IT SET ASIDE?
SUMMARY OF FACTS
In a consolidate action filed by both parties at the trial court. The respondent won in relation to declaration as a property. It was one of reliefs of the appellant as plaintiff in one of the consolidated suits that an earlier judgment be set aside for fraud.
It was against the negative judgment that this appeal emanated. It was unsuccessfully appealed at the Court of Appeal and now at the Supreme Court.
HELD
Unanimously dismissing the appeal with substantial cost to the respondent, the court held:
That the appellant failed to prove the respondent obtained the judgment by fraud; as his claim was devoid of the particulars of the fraud alleged. He was thus held not to have met the requirement to have the earlier judgment set aside for fraud.
ISSUES
Whether particulars of the fraud alleged were given in the appellant’s statement of claim and if given and whether they have been proved strictly as required by law?
RATIONES DECIDENDI
DUTY ON THE PLAINTIFF TO PROVE THAT THE ACT HE COMPLAINS OF CAUSED HIM DAMAGE
“To entitle a plaintiff to succeed for fraud committed on the court or the plaintiff, it is not enough to show that it was followed by damage to him, he must show that one was the cause of the other, he must establish that in doing the act whereby he suffered damages, he was “adhibens fidem” relying upon the truth of the representation. In order to establish this, the plaintiff will of course have to show that the misrepresentation was a material misrepresentation that is to say that it was capable of causing the damage of which he complains”. (Per , Obaseki, Acting C.J.N)
CASES CITED
1. Cammell v. Sewell (1858) 1 H. & N. 617 at 646.
2. Birch v. Birch (1902) P. 130 at 137 CA.
3. Coaks v. Boswell (1886) 11 App. Cas. 232 HL.
4. Boswell v. Cooks (No.2) (1894) LT. 3005 HL.
5. Thorne v. Smith (1947) KB. 307
6. Jonesco v. Beard (1930) AC. 298.
7. Stern v. Friedman (1953) 23 All ER. 565.
8. Hip Foong Hong v. H. Neotia & Co. (1918) AC. 888 PC.
9. Baker v. Wandsworth (1899) 67 LJQB. 301.
10. Everett v. Ribbands (1946) 175 LT. 143 CA.
11. Tamakloe v. The Basel Trading Company Ltd. 6 WACA. 231.
12. United African Company Ltd. v. Jones Eggay Taylor 2 WACA. 70 at 71 P.C.
13. Edgington v. Fitzmaurice (1885) 29 CH D. 459.
14. Briess v. Wooley (1954) A.C. 333.
15. Coaks v. Boswell (1886) 11 App Case 232.
16. Yorkshire Insurance v. Craine (1922) 2 AC. 541
STATUTES REFERRED TO
None.