CHIEF HAROLD SHODIPO VS. LEMMINKAINEN AND ANOR
July 22, 2025AYOGU UGWU & ANOR VS THE STATE
July 22, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (2022-03) Legalpedia 84750 (SC)
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria
Holden At Lagos
Fri Jan 17, 1986
Suit Number: SC 90/1985
CORAM
ESO, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
NNAMANI, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
UWAIS, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
KARIBI-WHYTE, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
KAWU, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
AIYEDOUN T. JULES
APPELLANTS
RAIMI AJANI
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
DAMAGE TO OR LOSS OF GOODS
SUMMARY OF FACTS
Plaintiffs/Appellants appealed to this Court against the dismissal of their appeal by the Court of Appeal. The Plaintiff’s claimed against the defendants jointly and severally for the sum of N20,000.00 being special and general damages for the loss of and/or non-delivery by the defendants as common carriers and bailees of 207 cases door locks out of 600 cases door locks consigned to the order to the plaintiff by China Material Metals and Minerals Import and Export Corporation from Shanghai. And in the alternative, the plaintiff claims special and general damages for negligence for their non-delivery.
HELD
The appeal was allowed.
ISSUES
The majority of the Justices of the Court of Appeal erred in law by construing clause 24 of the Bills of Lading Exhibits B and B1, as imposing a limitation of action on the appellants and thereby came to a wrong decision.
RATIONES DECIDENDI
MEANING OF EXPRESSION SUBJECT TO A DOCUMENT OR ENACTMENT
“It is now well settled that the expression subject to a document or enactment is used to assign a subordinate position to a clause section or an enactment or provide for qualifications.” Per KARIBI-WHYTE, JSC
THE OBLIGATION OF THE APPELLANT TO COMMENCE PROCEEDINGS
“The obligation of the Appellant is to commence proceedings within one year, of the delivery of goods or when the goods ought to have been delivered. The question of whether he can establish his claim to loss of or damage to the goods is of different matter and will depend upon the burden of proof on him to do so.” Per KARIBI-WHYTE, JSC
CASES CITED
Massey Harris Co. v. Strasburg (1941) 4 D.L.R. 620
STATUTES REFERRED TO
Not Available
