CHIEF NYA EDIM EKONG V CHIEF ASUQUO E. OTOP & ORS

CORAM

PARTIES

CHIEF NYA EDIM EKONG APPELLANTS

 CHIEF ASUQUO E. OTOP & ORS

RESPONDENTS 

AREA(S) OF LAW

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The appellant as plaintiff sued the defendants (now respondents) over a petition written by the 1st to 5th defendants in which he claimed that they falsely and maliciously published defamatory material concerning him. The petition was sparked off by a fracas at the Ediba swamp and marshlands between the indigenes of Akim clan on the one hand and those of the protesting clans. It was against this background that the appellant sued the respondents at the trial court claiming that he was libeled. In their statement of defence, the respondents denied liability and raised inter alia the defences of qualified privilege and fair comment. At the close of the case, the trial court entered judgment against the appellants and awardedN10, 000,000.00 against them as general damages. The defendants’ appeal against the judgment of the trial court was upheld by the Court of Appeal. . Dissatisfied with the judgment of the lower court, the Appellant has now appealed to the Supreme Court.

HELD

APPEAL DISMISSED.?

ISSUES

1. Whether the plaintiff has proven that the allegation in exhibits D, F and H referred to him were published by the defendants to a third party?

2. Whether the lower court was right in holding that the allegation complained of was true and as such not Libelous of the plaintiff?

3. Whether the defences of qualified privilege and fair comment are available to the defendants in this case?

4. Whether the lower court was right in refusing to re-assess the lump sum awarded as general damages by the trial court for the three causes of action in this suit?

RATIONES DECIDENDI

EVIDENCE: DUTY OF TRIAL COURT TO EVALUATE SAME

It is trite that all documents tendered before a court at the trial of a case is part and parcel of the evidence to be considered in the determination of issues before the court. Such documents usually referred to as exhibits are subject to scrutiny and to be tested for credibility and weight by the trial court.”PER JOHN INYANG OKORO JSC

DEFAMATION: WHAT CONSTITUTES A DEFAMATORY STATEMENT:

“A statement is said to be defamatory where, if published of and concerning a person is calculated to lowering him in the estimation of right-thinking men or cause him to be shunned or avoided or to expose him to hatred, contempt or ridicule, or to convey an imputation on him disparaging or injurious to him in his office, profession, calling, trade or business. Every person has a right to the protection of his good name, reputation and the estimation which he stands in the society of his fellow citizens. Thus, whoever publishes anything injurious to that good name, or reputation commits a tort of libel, if written and slander, if oral. “PER JOHN INYANG OKORO JSC
DEFAMATION: HOW DETERMINED:
“It must be noted that the test in determining whether the words complained of are defamatory is always that of a reasonable man. That is to say/ given the environment and the circumstances in which the statements were made and published what would be the interpretation and understanding of a man of ordinary understanding.”PER JOHN INYANG OKORO JSC

LIBEL: WHAT CONSTITUTES A LIBELOUS STATEMENT

The law is that to found action in libel the alleged libelous statement must not only be false, but must also be defamatory of the plaintiff.” PER SULEIMAN GALADIMA JSC

DEFAMATION: WORDS THAT CONSTITUTES SAME:

There is need to emphasize that it is not every statement which is made and which annoys a person that is defamatory. It is also not every vulgar statement, mere abuse or insult which is actionable”. PER JOHN INYANG OKORO JSC

DEFAMATION: COURT TO CONSTRUE WORDS USED AS A WHOLE

It is trite in determining whether the words complained of are defamatory, the said words must be construed as a whole and not in isolation.”PER JOHN INYANG OKORO JSC

DEFAMATION: EFFECT OF FALSEHOOD IN A CASE OF DEFAMATION

In an action for defamation if the statement or publication is found to be false, malice is automatically inferred, damages follow, and the hearing of the case comes to an end. The conclusion being that the publication was done for a clearly wrong motive.” PER BODE RHODES VIVOUR JSC

EVIDENCE: WHEN AN APPELLATE COURT EVALUATES DOCUMENTS

Where the trial court fails to examine documents tendered before it, an appellate court is in as good position to evaluate such exhibits “PER JOHN INYANG OKORO JSC

LIBEL: STATEMENTS THAT MAY GIVE RISE TO A CAUSE OF ACTION:

But let me state that it is not every statement which causes damages to a plaintiff that gives rise to a cause of action. The statement, to found an action in libel must be false and defamatory of the plaintiff.” PER JOHN INYANG OKORO JSC

PROCEDURE: HOW THE COURT DETERMINES A DEFAMATORY STATEMENT:

Thus, whenever a statement is placed before a court to determine whether or not it is defamatory, the court must make findings of fact whether the words complained of are capable of bearing defamatory meaning and then ask and find answer to, the question whether the plaintiff was actually defamed by those words.”PER JOHN INYANG OKORO JSC
PROOF OF LIBEL:WHAT TO BE PROVED IN AN ACTION OF LIBEL
“In an action for libel, the plaintiff must prove the following:
1. That the defendant published in a permanent form a statement;
2. That the statement referred to the plaintiff
3. That the statement conveys defamatory meaning to those to whom it was published; and
4. That the statement was defamatory of the plaintiff in the
sense that:
(a) It lowered him in the estimation of right thinking members of the society; or
(b) It exposed him to hatred, ridicule or contempt; or
(c) It injured his reputation in his office, trade or profession; or
(d) It injured his financial credit . PER JOHN INYANG OKORO JSC

LIBEL: WHEN A PLEA OF FAIR COMMENT SUCCEEDS

A plea of fair comment succeeds as a defence if the facts relied on by the defendant are sufficient to justify the statement or publication that the plaintiff finds to be libelous. The facts must be the truth.” PER BODE RHODES VIVOUR JSC

CASES CITED

DIN v. AFRICAN NEWS PAPER LIMITED (1990) 2NWLR (pt 139) 392Akomolafe & anor. V. Guardian Press Ltd & 3 ors (2010) I SC (Ptl) p.58Guardlan Newspaper Ltd & anor. V. Ajeh (2011) 4SC (Pt.ii) p.69ONYEJIKE V ANYASOR (1992) l NWLR (pt. 218) 437DIN V. AFRICAN NEWSPAPERS LTD (7990) 2 NWLR (pt. L39) 392DUMBO v. IDUGHOE (1983) 1 SCNLR 29AYENI V. DADA (1978) 3 SC. 35BAMGBOYE V. LARENWAJU (1997) 22 NSCC (pt. 1) 501SKETCH PIIBLISHING COMPANY LTD & ANOR. V. ALHAJI AZEES A. AJAGBEM0KEFERI (I989) 1 NWLR (pt. 700) 678OFFOBOCHE V. OGOJA LOCAL GOVERMMENT (2001) FWLR( PT 68) 1051OKOLO V. MIDWEST NEWSPAPER CORPORATION (1977) 1 SC 33OKAFOR V IKEANYI,(1973) 3 – 4 S.C. 99DULUMO V. SKETCH PUBLICATION COMPANY LTD (1972) 5 SC 308ONU V AGBESE (1985) l NWLR (pt.4) 704

STATUTES REFERRED TO

None

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT