B. O. FAMUYIWA VS FOLAWIYO & ORS - Legalpedia | The Complete Lawyer - Research | Productivity | Health

B. O. FAMUYIWA VS FOLAWIYO & ORS

PETER LOCKNAN & ANOR VS THE STATE
August 20, 2025
BANK OF THE NORTH LIMITED VS CENTRAL BANK OF NIGERIA
August 20, 2025
PETER LOCKNAN & ANOR VS THE STATE
August 20, 2025
BANK OF THE NORTH LIMITED VS CENTRAL BANK OF NIGERIA
August 20, 2025
Show all

B. O. FAMUYIWA VS FOLAWIYO & ORS

Legalpedia Citation: (1972) Legalpedia (SC) 11210

In the Supreme Court of Nigeria

Fri May 5, 1972

Suit Number: SC. 30/1970

CORAM


M.E. OGUNDERE – JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

UDOMA JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

FATAYI-WILLIAMS JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT


PARTIES


B. O. FAMUYIWA APPELLANTS


RESPONDENTS


AREA(S) OF LAW



SUMMARY OF FACTS

The plaintiff was one of the passengers in the vehicle driven by one Isaac Fafiolu, at Ibese, a lorry driven by the 2nd defendant and coming from the opposite direction passed so close to the vehicle in which the plaintiff was traveling, it brush-passed the said vehicle and severely injured the plaintiff who sustained a fracture of the right arm as a result.


HELD


The Court held that the appeal is therefore allowed and the judgment of the Lagos High Court in Suit No. LD/443/63 delivered on 9th May, 1966 is hereby set aside. The case is accordingly remitted to the High Court for Lambo, Ag. CJ., who originally heard the case to decide the claim on the merits.


ISSUES


Whether the views expressed in the cases to which learned counsel had referred us and which apply to Section 29 of the English Act apply equally to a claim made under Section 30 of the said Act.

Whether, in view of the provision of Section 26(a) of the Workmens Compensation Act, a plaintiff who has already been paid compensation by his employers can maintain a subsequent action for damages based on the same injury?


RATIONES DECIDENDI


OBJECT OF THIRD PARTY NOTICE


“It is also to prevent the same question from being tried twice with possibly different results.” FATAYI-WILLIAMS, CJN.


OBJECT OF THIRD PARTY NOTICE


“It must be noted that the object of the Third Party Notice is to prevent multiplicity of actions and to enable the court to settle disputes between all parties to them in one action.”


CASES CITED


Baxter v. France (1895) 1 QB 591

Benecke v. Frost (1876) 1 QBD

Oliver v.Nautilus Steam Shipping Co. Ltd.. (1903) 2 KB 639.

Western Nigeria Trading Co. v. Ajao (1965) NMLR 178

Burke and Unsworth v. Elder Dempster Lines Ltd. (1939) 3 All ER 339

Deane v. H. F. Edwards and Co. Ltd. (1941) 2 All ER 274 at p. 281

Young v. British Aeroplane Co. Ltd. (1946) 1 All ER 98 at p. 108

Olsen v. Magnesium Castings and Products Ltd. (1947) 1 All ER p.333.


STATUTES REFERRED TO


Workmens Compensation Act


CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT

Comments are closed.