ADEKOLA ALAGBE V. HIS HIGHNESS SAMUEL ABIMBOLA & ORS
August 4, 2025NIGERIAN MARITIME SERVICES LTD. V. ALHAJI BELLO AFOLABI
August 4, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (1978-02) Legalpedia (SC) 11411
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria
Fri Feb 17, 1978
Suit Number: SC. 197/1976
CORAM
OGUNDARE, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
MOHAMMED BELLO, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
ANIAGOLU JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
SAMUEL OLA OLADEHIN
APPELLANTS
CONTINENTAL TEXTILE MILLS LIMITED
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
TORT/ COURTS
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The plaintiff/appellant claimed the sum of £11,000 as special and general damages for nuisance and perpetual injunction to restrain the defendant, its servants and agents from continuing the said nuisance.
HELD
The Supreme Court held that the term strict proof required of special damages was used as a lever by the learned trial Judge to reject nearly all the evidence establishing particulars of special damage pleaded. The Court was unable to find any justification for the rejection of most of the evidence tendered in view of the finding (that damage was done) of liability against the respondent and the failure of the respondent to adduce contrary evidence of cost of repairs.
ISSUES
Whether the defendants are responsible in law for the damage caused in the circumstances
RATIONES DECIDENDI
DUTY OF TRIAL JUDGE TO EVALUATE RELEVANT AND MATERIAL EVIDENCE
“It is relevant at this stage to observe that it is the duty of a trial Judge to evaluate relevant and material evidence and decide the issues raised on the pleadings before him. He cannot abandon that duty by taking refuge in the clouds of “I believe” and “I do not believe” without really evaluating the evidence of vital witnesses. If he abandons this duty, the use of the expressions “I believe” and ” I do not believe” will not estop the appeal court from itself evaluating the evidence and seeing whether there is any justification for the use of such expressions.” Per OBASEKI, JSC
PRINCIPLE IN RYLANDS V. FLETCHER
“Ever since Rylands v. Fletcher (1868) LR 3 H.L. 330 the principle is well established that a person, who for his own purposes, brings on his land and collects and keep it there anything likely to do mischief if it is escapes must keep at his peril and if he fails to do so is prima facie liable for all the damage which is the natural consequences of the escape.” Per OBASEKI, JSC
CASES CITED
1. Rylands v. Fletcher (1868) LR 3 H.L. 330
2. E. K. Odulaja v. A. F. Haddad (1973) 1 All NLR 191 at 196
3. Alhaji Akibu v. Joseph Opaleye (1974) 11 S.C. 189 at 203
STATUTES REFERRED TO
Not Available
