UNION BANK OF NIG. PLC. V ASTRA BUILDERS (W.A.) LTD.

CORAM

PARTIES

UNION BANK OF NIG. PLC. APPELLANTS

ASTRA BUILDERS (W.A.) LTD.

RESPONDENTS 

AREA(S) OF LAW

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The respondent claimed that by virtue of a written sub-lease agreement between him and the appellant, he was entitled to a statutory right of occupancy. The defendant brought an application to dismiss the case. The trial judge dismissed the application. Being aggrieved, the appellant unsuccessfully appealed. Being further aggrieved, the appellant has appealed.

HELD

Appeal dismissed

ISSUES

(1) Was the Court of Appeal right in confirming the exercise of discretion of the trial court?

(2) Was the Court of Appeal not duty bound to dismiss the respondent’s suit that arose out of a contract prohibited and declared unlawful by Section 22 of the Land Use Act and declared null and void by Section 26 of the said Land Use Act.?

(3) Did the failure of the Court of Appeal to consider and pronounce on the propriety of appellant’s issue No.3 deny the appellant fair hearing which occasioned justice?

RATIONES DECIDENDI

JUDICIAL DISCRETION: MEANING

A judicial discretion means the power exercised in an official capacity in a manner which appears to be just and proper under a given situation. It must not flow from or be bound by a previous decision of another court in which a discretion was exercised. It is in short an antithesis to the doctrine of stare decisis. There is no hard and fast rule as to the exercise of a judicial discretion by a court for if that happens, a discretion becomes fettered. Per ADEKEYE, JSC

PLEADINGS UNSUPPORTED WITH EVIDENCE

Pleadings however strong and convincing the averments may be, without evidence of proof thereof go to no issue. Per ADEKEYE, JSC

CONFLICTING DEPOSITIONS OF PARTIES :DUTY OF COURT

Where the deposition of parties conflict, the trial court was correct to hold that the issues on which the parties joined issues should be dealt with when document and oral evidence are placed before the court. Per ADEKEYE, JSC

FAIR HEARING : YARDSTICK FOR DETERMINATION.

The yardstick for determining the observance of fair hearing in trials is not the question whether any injustice has been occasioned on any party due to want of hearing. It is rather the question whether an opportunity of hearing was afforded to parties entitled to be heard. Per ADEKEYE, JSC

DISCRETION OF COURT : BASIS FOR.

It is only upon known or undisputed facts and disclosed facts that a court seeking to do what is fair and equitable may exercise its discretion. Per ADEKEYE, JSC

CASES CITED

1. Adeponle v. Saidi (1956) 3 SCNLR 203

2. Imana v. Robinson (1979) 3-4 SC 1

3. George v. Dominion Flour Mills Ltd. (1963) 1 SCNLR 117.

4. Odusote v. Odusote (1971) 1 ALL NLR 219 at page 222

5. Anyah v. African Newspapers of Nigeria Ltd. (1992) 6 NWLR (pt.247) pg. 3176. Falobi v. Falobi (1976) 9 -10 SC 1

7. Akinsete v. Akindulire (1966) 1 SCNLR 389

8. Fashanu v. Adekoya (1974) 1 ALL NLR pt.1 pg. 35

9. J.C.C. Inter Ltd. v. N.G.1. Ltd. (2002) 4 WRN 91 104

10. Saleh v. Monguno (2003) 1 NWLR pt. 801 pg. 221

STATUTES REFERRED TO

Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT