SUNDAY IHUEBEKA VS THE STATE
June 26, 2025CHIEF OMONIYI FAYEHUN & ORS VS CHIEF R.A. FADOJU & ORS
June 26, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (2000) Legalpedia (SC) 54111
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria
Tue Apr 11, 2000
Suit Number: SC. 79/1994 (2000)
CORAM
BELGORE JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
OGWUEGBU JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
ONU JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
ACHIKE JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
KALGO JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
ANTHONY EHIDIMHEN APPELLANTS
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The Plaintiff instituted an action against the defendant at the trial court for damages suffered by the Plaintiff as a result of an accident involving the Plaintiff’s Peugeot saloon car and the 2nd defendant’s lorry driven by the first defendant for and on behalf of the second defendant. The trial judge entered judgment in favour of the claimant. The respondents were not happy with the judgment hence appealed to the lower court which allowed the appeal and set aside the judgment of the trial court. Dissatisfied with the judgment, the appellant appealed to this court ?
HELD
The court dismissed the appeal and held that the letter did not constitute estoppels against the 2nd respondent and ordered a retrial.
ISSUES
Whether the Court of Appeal was correct in setting aside the decision of the trial court refusing to grant the defendants leave to amend their statement of defence at the close of the plaintiff’s case?Is “G.B. Ollivant (Nig.) Ltd” one and the same as “G.B. Ollivant a Division of U.A.C. Nig. Ltd.Is U.A.C. Nig. Ltd a proper party in this suit and vicariously liable for the act of the first Defendant’
RATIONES DECIDENDI
PLEADINGS-AMENDMENT OF- WHEN WILL BE ALLOWED
“Now, it is well settled law that an amendment of pleadings should be allowed unless:-
(1) It will entail injustice to the Respondents
(2) The applicant is acting mala fide vide Tildersley v. Harper (1878) 10 Ch.D. 393 at 396.
(3) By his blunder the applicant has done some injury to the respondents which cannot be compensated for by costs or otherwise.” PER S.U. ONU, JSC
A PERSON WHO MAKES ALLEGATIONS IN PLEADINGS HAS THE ONUS OF SUBSTANTIATING SAME
A person who makes allegations in a pleading is by the ordinary rules of pleading, bound to substantiate them and it is well known that civil cases are decided on a preponderance of evidence -Ogwuegbu J.S.C
OPERATION OF THE PRINCIPLE OF ESTOPPEL
Before estoppel applies, there must be some previous act, declaration, act or omission intentionally made by a person which caused or permitted another person to believe to be true and upon which the latter acted to his detriment. In that case, and in that case only can the principle of estoppel apply and the person who made the said act, declaration or omission cannot be allowed to deny such act, declaration or omission. – Kalgo J.S.C.
CASES CITED
Osinrinde v. Ajamogun (1992) 6 NWLR (Pt. 246) 156Kodilinye v. Odu (1935) 2 WACA 336 at 337 Elias v. Omo Bare (1982) 5 S.C 25 at 47Tildersley v. Harper (1878) 10 Ch.D. 393 at 396?
STATUTES REFERRED TO
None.
