RALPH NWAZURIKE & ORS V A.G. OF THE FEDERATION
June 4, 2025THE NIGERIAN AIR FORCE V EX – SQN LEADER M.O. KAMALDEEN
June 4, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (2007) Legalpedia (SC) 21718
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria
Fri Feb 23, 2007
Suit Number: SC.74/2002
CORAM
PARTIES
DALEK NIG. LIMITED APPELLANTS
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The Respondents engaged the professional services of the Appellants in several projects. After the services were rendered, the Respondents defaulted in paying the agreed fees and stated that it did not employ the services of the Appellant in respect of 192 other projects in Edo, Ondo, Delta and Rivers States as claimed by the Appellant.
HELD
The Court held that from the terms of the written contract between the parties, it was clear that the appellant needs to produce evidence that the respondent specifically requested it to supervise any of the 192 projects before it could claim under the contract.
ISSUES
1. Did the Court of Appeal go outside the issues submitted to it for adjudication when it held that Exhibit B amounted to counter offer and was it right in so holding?2. From the totality of evidence oral and documentary, was the Court of Appeal right in setting aside the award of N211, 157,536 in favour of the Appellant on the ground that the 192 projects were not awarded to it.3. Was the Court of Appeal right in attaching no weight to Exhibit M in consequence of the finding that 192 projects were not awarded to the Appellant?
RATIONES DECIDENDI
FUNCTION OF PLEADINGS
“It is settled law that one of the functions of pleadings is to avoid taking the other party by surprise. It is therefore clear that the lower court was in error in suo motu raising the issue of exhibit B being a counter offer contrary to the pleadings of the parties, the grounds of appeal and the issues formulated therefrom for the determination of the appeal.” Per W.S.N. ONNOGHEN, JSC
RELEVANCE AND ADMISSIBILITY OF A DOCUMENT
“It is settled law, that it is the relevance of a document and not the weight to be attached to it, that is paramount. In other words, the position of the law, is that admissibility, is one thing, while the probative value that may be placed thereon, is another. Relevance and admissibility of a document are separate matters in contradiction from the weight to be attached to it.” I. F. OGBUAGU JSC
CASES CITED
Okonji & 2 Ors v. Njokanma & 2 ors (1998) 12 SCNJ 259 at 273 – 275Kotoye v. C.B.N. & 71 Ors. (1989) 1 NWLR (Pt. 98) 419; (1989) 2 SCNJ 31Okonji & 2 Ors v. Njokanma & 2 ors (1998) 12 SCNJ 259 at 273 – 275?
STATUTES REFERRED TO
None
