ESSENTIAL LOGISTICS LTD V CHIEF VICTOR ODILI & ORS

CORAM

JOSEPH SHAGBOAR IKYEGH, JUSTICE COURT OF APPEAL

PARTIES

ESSENTIAL LOGISTICS LTD APPELLANTS

1. CHIEF VICTOR ODILI (OON)

2. TREVI FOUNDATION LTD

RESPONDENTS 

AREA(S) OF LAW

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The  Claimant/Appellant a tenant of the 1st Defendant/Respondent in the property situate at 27A Bishop Oluwole Street, Victoria Island, Lagos, commenced an action at the High Court of Lagos State seeking a declaration that the 1st Defendant /Respondent has not validly determined the Claimant’s tenancy in respect of the premises in dispute. The Defendants/Counter-Claimant/Respondent filed a counter-claim seeking a declaration that the tenancy of the defendant to the counter – claim as contained in the Tenancy Agreement dated 1st day of May, 2007 had been validly determined in accordance with the provisions of the said agreement and for an order of the Court directing the Claimant/Appellant to deliver unencumbered possession of the premises in dispute to the Defendant/Counter-claimant/Respondent. The trial Court dismissed the Claimant/Appellant’s claim and entered judgment for the Defendants/Counter-Claimants/Respondents. Dissatisfied with the judgment of the trial court, the Appellant has lodged the instant appeal and a motion for stay of execution.

HELD

Appeal Dismissed

ISSUES

1. Whether it was open to the learned trial judge to enter judgment for the Respondents on the ground that they have proved their courter claim when infact the said Respondents did not deny that the Appellant is a yearly tenant who requires a 6 (six) months notice to quit for a valid determination of its tenancy.?

2. Whether in view of the Respondents’ admission of improper and/or non service of statutory notices on the Appellant, the Respondent established by credible and cogent evidence that   the   Appellant’s   tenancy   had been determined.?

RATIONES DECIDENDI

TERMINATION OF TENANCY- LENGTH OF STATUTORY NOTICE TO TERMINATE A TENANCY THAT EXPIRES BY OPERATION OF LAW

“Ordinarily, a tenancy for a term certain expires by operation of law at the end of the period and the law is that only a notice of owners intention to apply to recovers possession will be served on the party. However, where the same agreement contains a proviso that it may be terminated by one party or both with a notice of Termination, it is also permissible. This merely gives the tenant the option to determine the tenancy”. PER BAGE JCA

TENANCY AGREEMENTS-HOW TENANCY AGREEMENT CAN BE DETERMINED

“It is also trite law that tenancy agreements can only be determined by a valid notice to quit issued and served and meant to expire of the anniversary of the tenancy.”
“It is trite that when words are clear and unambiguous, they should be given their ordinary and literal meaning.” PER BAGE, JCA

STATUTORY NOTICES-STATUTORY NOTICES MUST BE SERVED PERSONALLY ON A TENANT- EXCEPTION TO THE RULE

“It is the law that statutory notices must be served personally on the tenant and not otherwise. The only exception to that where the tenant could not be found to effect personal service on, then a copy of the said notice may be posted at some conspicuous place in the premises sought to be recovered. However, before the court would deem same as proper service, the Plaintiff must convince it that several exhaustive and frantic attempts were made to serve tenant without success.” PER BAGE, JCA

EVIDENCE-WHETHER ADMITTED FACTS NEED FURTHER PROOF

“It is trite law that facts if admitted need not be proved and is deemed to have been established.” PER BAGE, JCA

TENANCY- WHEN DURATION OF TENANCY LAPSES- RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LAND AND TENANT

“it is the law that when time fixed for the tenancy to run lapses, the relationship of landlord and tenant automatically terminates and the landlord if he so wishes, may take possession through the due process of law after serving on the tenant notice of owners intention to apply to recover possession [i.e. seven days notice).” PER BAGE, JCA

CONTRACT-WHETHER A BENEFICIARY OF A CONTRACT CAN TURN AROUND AND COMPLAIN THAT SUCH A TRANSACTION IS ILLEGAL OR VOID

“The Supreme Court per Belgore JSC (as he then was) in the same decision of ALH. AMINU IBRAHIM VS. MR. FELIX OSIM (supra) stated as follows:
“No person who commits illegality which is a crime with legal sanction of punishment in term of conviction should derive any benefit thereof. If it is an illegal transaction, the Appellant by his conduct in all the courts below and in this court, is praying that his crime be condoned with all the benefits that accrued to him by way of financial gain and to let it end there. That will not only be unjust but will also not be equitable. No person shall, after reaping benefit from a transaction of which he is a party be heard to say such transaction of which he is a party is illegal or void or voidable when it comes to him to fulfill his obligation under the transaction so far the other party has done all he had pledged to do under it See AYO SOLANKE VS. ABRAHAM ABED AND ANOR (1962) 1 ALL N.L.R. 230 at 231.In a situation where a statute declares a contract not only void but also imposes a penalty, that contract is illegal abinitio. But where the legal sanction is merely to prevent abuse or fraud and no penalty is provided, it is merely voidable. However, the avoidance is only possible when the person seeking to avoid has not derived benefit to the detriment of the other party to the contract “. PER BAGE JCA

CONTRACT-DEFINITION OF AN ILLEGAL CONTRACT

“What then is an illegal contract as postulated by the Appellant. The Supreme Court in the case of Chief A.N ONYINKE III VS G.E. OKEKE (1976) 1 ALL NLR (PL 1) 181 at Pages 187-188 described an illegal contract in the following words.
“It is trite law that a contract is illegal if the consideration or promise involves doing something illegal or contrary to public policy or if the intention of the parties in making the contract is thereby to promote something which is illegal or contrary to public policy; and an illegal contract is void and cannot be the foundation of any legal right. This proposition of law was clearly enunciated by Brett, M>R. in HERMAN VS. JEUCHNER (1885) 15 Q.B.D. 561 at page 563 as follows:
When the object of either the promises or the consideration is to promote the committal of an illegal act, the contract itself is illegal and cannot be enforced” PER BAGE, JCA

CLEAR AND UNAMBIGUOUS WORDS-NEED TO BE GIVEN THEIR ORDINARY AND LITERAL MEANING

“It is trite that when words are clear and unambiguous, they should be given their ordinary and literal meaning. PER BAGE, JCA

CASES CITED

Ayo Solanke vs. Abraham Abed and Anor (1962) 1 ALL N.L.R. 230 at 231Chief A.N Onyinke III vs. G.E. Okeke (1976) 1 ALL NLR (PL 1) 181 at Pages 187-188English Exporters (London) LTD vs. S.A. Ayanda (1973) 1 ALL NLR (Pt 1) 215 at pages 218-219,Herman vs. Jeuchner (1885) 15 Q.B.D. 561 at page 563 jHughes vs. The Directors Of The Metropolitan Railway CO. (1877) 2 APP. CAS. 439 at page 448Levey vs. Goldberg (1922) 1 K.B. 688,Nigerian Joint Agency Ltd vs. Arrow Engineering and General Transport Co. Ltd 1970) 1 ALL N.L.R. 323 at pp 325 and 330Ogie vs Earp Vane (1886) L.R. 3 Q.B. 272;Oilfield Supply Centre Ltd vs. Joseph Llyod Johnson (1987) 2 NWLR (Pt 58) 265 at 266, 639, 640Shaw vs. Shaw (1965) 1 W.L.R. 537William Hill (Parklane) Ltd vs. Holman (1950) 1 ALL E.R. 1013

STATUTES REFERRED TO

Lagos State Rent and Recovery of Premises Law 2003

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT