CORAM
GEORGE ADESOLA OGUNTADE (Lead Judgment), JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
GEORGE ADESOLA OGUNTADE (Lead Judgment), JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
JOSEPH SHAGBAOR IKYEGH, JUSTICE COURT OF APPEAL
PARTIES
CHEVRON NIGERIA LIMITED APPELLANTS
LONESTAR DRILLING NIGERIA LIMITED
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The Respondent in this appeal was the Plaintiff at the Delta State High Court of Justice sitting at Warri where it instituted a suit against the Appellant which was the Defendant claiming the sum of US$10,000.000.00 as special and general damages for breach of contract of supply of Rig brought by sea from India to Nigeria. The breakdown of the claim is US$1.5 million cost of freight of the Rig; US$1.5 million interest on Bank loan obtained for the purchase of the Rig; US$2.5 million for loss of earnings on the Rig and US$5 million as general damages.
HELD
APPEAL DISMISSED
ISSUES
1. Whether or not the Court of Appeal was right in holding that the Plaintiffs action discloses a reasonable cause of action against the defendant/appellant.2. Whether the Court of Appeal was right in holding that the Plaintiffs claim is contract and not admiralty thereby vesting the Delta State High Court with jurisdiction as against the Federal High Court
RATIONES DECIDENDI
MEANING OF CAUSE OF ACTION
“I think a cause of action is constituted by the bundle or aggregate of facts which the law will recognize as giving the plaintiff a substantive right to make the claim against the relief or remedy being sought. Thus the factual situation on which the plaintiff relies to support his claim must be recognized by the law as giving rise to a substantive right capable of being claimed or enforced against the defendant. In other words the factual situation relied upon must constitute the essential ingredients of an enforceable right or claim.
PARTIES IN A CASE MUST BE GIVEN OPPORTUNITIES TO STATES THEIR CASE
That, it must be said, is not the way the court operates. A party ought not to be precluded from putting across his case in a full hearing except on the clearest indication that the action is denuded of all merits even on the supposition that the averments in the statement of claim are deemed as admitted by a defendant. – PER OGUNTADE, JSC
CASES CITED
Afolayan v. OgunrindeDrummond-Jackson v. British Medical Association & OrsHubbuck & Sons Ltd. v. Wilkinson, Heywood & Clark LimitedEseigbe v. Agholor
STATUTES REFERRED TO
Order 18 rule 19 of the English rules of the Supreme Court (See Volume 1 of the Supreme Court Practice (1979)