STIRLING CIVIL ENGINEERING (NIG) LTD V. AMBASSADOR MAHMOOD YAYAYA
June 10, 2025ADETOKUNBO OGUNLANA & ORS VS THE STATE
June 10, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (2005) Legalpedia (SC) 14151
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria
Fri Apr 15, 2005
Suit Number: SC.49/1999
CORAM
IGNATIUS CHUKWUDI PATS-ACHOLONU, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
REYNOLDS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY NIGERIA LTD APPELLANTS
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The respondent refused to accept the keys to his property on expiration of tenancy on the grounds the appellant refused to put the property in a tenantable condition and subsequently sue for arrears of rent and mesne profit for the period.
HELD
The court held that where there is a breach of covenant to repair, the appropriate remedy open to such a landlord is to ask for possession or undertake the repairs and bring an action for damages.
ISSUES
1. Whether the Court of Appeal was correct in law when it held that ‘mitigation’ was not pleaded by the appellant and that mitigation was the crucial reason for dismissing the plaintiffs claim.2. If ‘mitigation’ was not pleaded by the appellant as the Court of Appeal held, did the respondent prove its case on a balance of probabilities as required by law?
RATIONES DECIDENDI
CASES CITED
1) Hill v. Barclay (1810) 16 Ves. 402 at 4062) B.E.O.O. v. Maduakoh (1975) 12 S.C. 913) Incar v. Benson (1975) 3 S. C. 1174) Shell B.P. v. Cole 1978 3 S.C. 183; WA.E.C. v. Koroye (1977) 2 S.C. 455) Agunwa v. Onukwe (1962) 1 All N.L.R. 5376) Osuji v. Isiocha (1989) 3 NWLR (Pt. 111) 623 at 640
STATUTES REFERRED TO
NONE
