May 25, 2025
Legalpedia Citation: (2010) Legalpedia (SC) 17083 In the Supreme Court of Nigeria Fri May 14, 2010 Suit Number: SC. 57/2003 CORAM PARTIES BALIOL NIGERIA LTD. APPELLANTS NAVCON NIGERIA […]
CORAM
PARTIES
BALIOL NIGERIA LTD. APPELLANTS
NAVCON NIGERIA LTD
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The appellant instituted action in respect of an agreement between the parties which was expressed to be irrevocable. The court of appeal relied on other extrinsic evidence to hold that it was revocable.
HELD
The court allowed the appeal, restored the decision of the trial court and awarded the appellant damages for breach of the contract.
ISSUES
John Holt Ltd. v. Stephen Lare 09J~L.ll NIR 14
IJiou (Nig.) Ltd. v. Osidoroewo (1992) 6 NWLR (Pt.249) 463 @ 649.
Mercantile Bank at Nigeria Ltd. v .. Ada/rna Tanker & Bunkering Services Ltd. (1990) 5 NWLR (Pt.153) 747 @ 1765
Tukur v Government of Gongola State (1989) 4 NWLR (Pt. 117) 517;
Chime v. Ude (1996) 7 NWLR (Pt. 461) 379
RATIONES DECIDENDI
VARIATION OF A WRITTEN CONTRACT
where a contract is in writing, any agreement which seeks to vary the original agreement, must itself be in writing- Ogbuagu J.S.C.
VARIATION OF A WRITTEN CONTRACT
A latter agreement by parties to an original contract to extinguish the rights and obligations that the original contract has created, is itself a binding contract, but the latter agreement, must either (a) be made under seal or (b) be supported by consideration… Where however, the contract is still executory, that is enough consideration – Ogbuagu J.S.C.
DUTY OF COURT IN INTERPRETING AGREEMENTS BETWEEN PARTIES
It is not the duty of a court to re-write an agreement for the parties. When parties have used clear and unambiguous: words, such words must be given their plain interpretation – Fabiyi J.S.C
CASES CITED
1. Was the agreement between the Appellant and the Respondent a Sale of Good Agreement?
2. Were the Learned Justices of Court of Appeal (sic) right in holding that paragraph 1 of the Amended Statement of Defence did not constitute an admission of the irrevocability of the agreement of 71h October, 1994.?
3. Were the Learned Justices of the Court of Appeal were right in holding that had they found that there was a binding agreement between the parties, they would have awarded to the Plaintiff (now Appellant) only -N1, 409, 080.00?
STATUTES REFERRED TO
None.