CORAM
SALIHU MODIBBO ALFA BELGORE, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
HON. JUSTICE K.M.O. KEKERE- EKUN JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
BAKER MARINE NIGERIA LIMITED APPELLANTS
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
A matter for arbitration between the parties to this appeal was referred to an arbitration panel. The decision of the panel was not satisfactory to the respondent, so it went to the Federal High Court for an order that the award be set aside, or an order refusing the enforcement of the award. The Federal High Court granted the application and set aside the award of the panel. Equally, the substantial damages of US$750,000 payment awarded was set aside. Aggrieved by the decision, the respondent appealed to the Court of Appeal. The court found the appeal devoid of merit, and dismissed it. Aggrieved again, the respondent/appellant appealed to the Supreme Court.
HELD
The appeal lacked substance and merit and was dismissed.
ISSUES
Whether there is an error on the face of the award as to justify the order of the court below confirming the order of the Federal High Court which set aside the damages, of US$750,000 awarded by the Arbitrators in favor of the Appellant.
Whether damages for the tort of conspiracy as opposed to that for breach of contract can be at large and aggravated.
RATIONES DECIDENDI
A COURT OR TRIBUNAL CANNOT WRITE A NEW CONTRACT FOR THE PARTIES
“In the interpretation of contracts or documents, the basic principle of law, is that, it is not the duty of any court or tribunal, to make contracts for the parties. Contracts, as a rule, are made by the parties thereto who are bound by the terms thereof and the court are always reluctant, to read into a contract, terms on which there is no agreement.” Per I.F. OGBUAGU, JSC
CASES CITED
Fakorede & Ors. V. Attorney-General of Western State (1972) 1 ALL NLR 178 at 189.
Alhaji Baba v, Nigerian Civil Aviation Training Centre & Anor. (1991) 5 NWLR (Pt 192) 388 at 413 (1991) 7 SCNJ. 1.
Aouad V. Kessrawani (1956) SCNLR 83; (1956) 1 FSC 35.
STATUTES REFERRED TO
None.