Just Decided Cases

NURSING AND MIDWIFERY COUNCIL OF NIGERIA V PATRICK OGU & ANOR

Legalpedia Citation: (2019) Legalpedia (SC) 41831

In the Supreme Court of Nigeria

HOLDEN AT ABUJA

Thu Apr 11, 2019

Suit Number: SC.818/2016

CORAM



PARTIES


NURSING AND MIDWIFERY COUNCIL OF NIGERIA APPELLANTS


1. PATRICK OGU 2. THERESA OGU ONYEDIKACHI RESPONDENTS


AREA(S) OF LAW



SUMMARY OF FACTS

The Plaintiffs/Respondents instituted an action against the Defendant/Appellant on grounds that the Appellant refused to verify the 1st Respondent’s practicing licence as a Nurse because, according to the Appellant, the 1st Respondent falsified his date of birth. It was alleged that the certificate issued by the Appellant to the 2nd Respondent contained the photograph of a male person that is different from the 2nd Respondent. The Respondents requested the Appellant to change the certificate issued to the 2nd Respondent by issuing the right certificate but it omitted, neglected and/or refused to do so. Upon the refusal of the Appellant to verify the licence of the 1st Respondent and to change the certificate of the 2nd Respondent, the Respondents approached the Federal High Court seeking the reliefs contained on the face of the Originating Summons. The trial court granted the reliefs claimed by the Respondents. Dissatisfied, the Appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal which also affirmed the decision of the trial court. Further dissatisfied with the lower court’s decision, the Appellant has appealed to this court.


HELD


Appeal Dismissed


ISSUES


Whether the facts and circumstances of this case are such that this Honourable Court will interfere with it long held judicial position that the Supreme Court will not disturb the concurrent findings of facts of two (2) lower courts. Whether the Court of Appeal did not consider the principles needed for the award of damages.


RATIONES DECIDENDI


AFFIDAVIT EVIDENCE- MODE OF RESOLUTION OF TWO CONFLICTING AFFIDAVIT EVIDENCE


“It is indeed right that where there are material conflicts in the affidavit evidence between that of the appellant and respondent the court is enjoined to have such conflict resolved by calling for oral evidence as it is unsafe to act on affidavit evidence strongly contested on the other side and the issue of credibility thereby brought to the fore. In other words, the court acts solely on an affidavit in which the facts are not disputed or where the parties agree that this should be done. I place reliance on Eboh & Anor v Oki & Ors (1974) LPELR- 990 (SC); Akinsete v Akindutire (1966) 1 All NLR 147 at 148; Falobi v Falobi (1976) 9-10 SC (Reprint) 1.”


AFFIDAVIT EVIDENCE- WHETHER ORAL EVIDENCE CAN BE USED TO VARY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE


“It is difficult to fault the court below holding that 1st respondent proved his birth date as 22nd February, 1981 and not 22nd February 1984. In taking this position, one is mindful of the fact that oral evidence cannot be brought in to vary or alter the clear information stated in the documents referred to in the affidavit as Section 128 (1) of the Evidence Act, 2011 provides.”


EXEMPLARY DAMAGES – GUIDING PRINCIPLES FOR THE AWARD OF EXEMPLARY DAMAGES


“This court has laid down the guiding principles guiding the award of exemplary damages in the case of CBN v Okojie (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt. 1479) 231 at 261 thus:
Exemplary damages are awarded with the object of punishing the defendant for his conduct in inflicting injury on the plaintiff. They can be made in addition to normal compensatory damages and should be made only:
In a case of oppressive, arbitrary or unconstitutional acts by government servants;
Where the defendant’s conduct had been calculated by him to make profit for himself, which might well exceed the compensation payable to the plaintiff; and
Where expressly authorized by statute.
The Supreme Court went on at pages 263 of the CBN v Okojie (supra) as follows:
For exemplary damages to be award it need not be specifically claimed, but facts to justify it must be pleaded and proved. Thus once facts in the pleadings support the award of exemplary damages the court should award it since the adverse party is in no way taken by surprise. Furthermore, since rules of court nowhere say that exemplary damages must be specifically claimed, it can be granted if facts are pleaded and evidence led to justify it.”


CASES CITED


None


STATUTES REFERRED TO


Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended)|Evidence Act, 2011|Nursing and Midwifery Registration Act, Cap 143 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004|


CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT

Esther ORIAH

Recent Posts

RENCO NIGERIA LIMITED V Q OIL & GAS SERVICES LIMITED & ANOR

Legalpedia Citation: (2025-08) Legalpedia 42685 (CA) In the Court of Appeal PORT HARCORT Mon Aug…

2 days ago

ENGINEERING ENTERPRISE OF NIGER CONTRACTOR CO. OF NIGERIA VS THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF KADUNA STATE

Legalpedia Citation: Legalpedia SC KIZW In the Supreme Court of Nigeria Thu Sep 11, 2025…

2 days ago

COMMISSONER OF POLICE, WESTERN REGION VS ALOYSIUS IGWE & 2 ORS

Legalpedia Citation: (1960-01) Legalpedia 19912 (SC) In the Supreme Court of Nigeria Holden at Lagos…

2 days ago

CLEMENT AKRAN VS INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE

Legalpedia Citation: (1960-02) Legalpedia 45350 (SC) In the Supreme Court of Nigeria HOLDEN AT LAGOS…

2 days ago

J. A. IREM VS OBUBRA DISTRICT COUNCIL AND OTHERS

Legalpedia Citation: (1960-03) Legalpedia 03348 (SC) In the Supreme Court of Nigeria HOLDEN AT LAGOS…

2 days ago

JOHN KHALIL KHAWAM AND CO VS K CHELLARAM AND SONS (NIGERIA)

Legalpedia Citation: (1960-03) Legalpedia 49115 (SC) In the Supreme Court of Nigeria HOLDEN AT LAGOS…

2 days ago