BARCLAYS BANK OF NIGERIA LTD VS ALHAJI MAIWADA ABUBAKAR
August 5, 2025SIKIRU AGBOOLA LASISI V. REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES
August 6, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (1977-07) Legalpedia (SC) 11741
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria
Thu Jul 7, 1977
Suit Number: SC. 337/1975
CORAM
ALEXANDER, CHIEF JUSTICE, NIGERIA
EMANUEL OBIOMA OGWUEGBU, JSC. JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT (Read the Leading Judgment)
OKAY ACHIKE JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
ARAB BANK (NIGERIA) LTD
APPELLANTS
ALHAJI AMINU DANTATA
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
LAW OF CONTRACT-GUARANTEE FOR A LOAN
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The respondent was one of the guarantors for a loan obtained by a third party. The third party failed to repay the loan so the guarantors were held liable. The respondent refused to pay his share because the appellants failed to obtain the signature of one of the guarantors.
HELD
The court held that the respondent was not liable under the contract because the appellant had failed to obtain the signature of the 4th respondent which was a condition in the contract.
ISSUES
1. Whether the learned trial judge erred in holding that the cases of Hansard V. Lethbridge & Ors and The National Bank of England V.Brackenbury applied to the present action in that there was no condition precedent requiring the guarantee to be signed by particular persons.
2. Whether the learned trial judge erred in law in not distinguishing the above quoted cases from the present action on the question of contribution
RATIONES DECIDENDI
DETERMINING LIABILITY OF A GUARANTOR
“As a general rule, where in a written contract it appears that both parties have agreed that something shall be done, which cannot effectively be done unless both concur in doing it, the construction of the contract is that each agrees to do all that is necessary to be done on his part for the carrying out of that thing, though there may be no express words to that effect. PER FATAYI-WILLIAMS JSC
RIGHTS AND DUTY OF CONTRIBUTION
“The rights and duty of contribution is based not on contract but on the doctrines of equity. Of course the issue of contribution only arises if the person asked to contribute is a party to the original contract of guarantee. If he has been released from liability under the contract as is the case in the matter now before us, the issue contribution does not arise. No person can be called upon to contribute to a non existent liability” PER FATAYI-WILLIAMS JSC
CASES CITED
1. COYTE V. ELPHICK (1874) 22 WR 541
2. CUMBERLEDGE V. LAWSON (1857)26 LJCP 120
3. EVANS V.BREMBRIDGE (1855) 69 E.R 741
4. GOODS OF COWARDIN (1901)18 TLR 220
STATUTES REFERRED TO
Not Available
