UNION BANK OF NIGERIA PLC V MR. N.M. OKPARA CHIMAEZE

CORAM

SYLVESTER UMARU ONU JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT(Read the Leading Judgment)

PARTIES

UNION BANK OF NIGERIA PLC APPELLANTS

 MR. N.M. OKPARA CHIMAEZE

RESPONDENTS 

AREA(S) OF LAW

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The Respondent/Cross Appellant as Plaintiff instituted an action against the Appellant/Cross Respondent as the Defendant at the trial Court claiming the sum of Thirty Million Naira as general and special damages for the wrongful dishonour of the cheque he drew on the Appellant/Cross Respondent in favour of Lever Brothers Nigeria Plc. The Respondent/Cross Appellant averred that he had sufficient credit in the account which he operated as a general trader and a major distributor of Lever Brothers Nigeria Plc. The Appellant /Cross Respondent contended that the Respondent/Cross Appellant had insufficient fund in the account.  The trial Court awarded the Respondent/Cross Appellant the sum of N100, 000 and N250, 000.00k as general and special damages respectively. Dissatisfied with the trial court’s judgment, the Appellant/Cross Respondent appealed to the lower court. The Respondent/Cross Appellant also cross appealed against the trial court’s judgment. The lower court dismissed the Appellant’s appeal in its entirety, allowed in part the Respondent’s Cross appeal and consequentially increased the general damages awarded the latter from N100,000.00K (One Hundred Thousand Naira only) to N1,000,000.00K (One Million Naira only) . Aggrieved, both parties have appealed against the lower court’s decision.

HELD

Appeal Dismissed

ISSUES

1. Whether the lower court’s interference with the general damages awarded by the trial court is on the basis of these principles?

2, Whether or not the court below was right in affirming the award of the sum of N250, 000.00 (solicitors cost) as special damages to the respondent in the circumstances of this suit?

3. Whether or not there are circumstances in this case to warrant the increase by the court below of the general damages from N100, 000.00k (one hundred thousand naira) to N 100,000.00k (sic) one million naira in favour of the respondent?

RATIONES DECIDENDI

AWARD OF DAMAGES-OBJECT OF

“The object of an award of damages is to give compensation to the plaintiff for the damages, loss or injury which he has suffered. However, before damages can be recovered by a claimant, there must be a wrong committed. In other words, recoverable damages by a plaintiff must be attributable to the breach of some duty by the defendant.” PER ARIWOOLA, JSC

SPECIAL DAMAGES-ONUS OF PROOF- HOW DISCHARGED

“On special damages, it has been held that where the plaintiff plead the special damages and gives necessary particulars and adduce some evidence of it without the defendant challenging or contradicting the evidence, he has discharged the onus of proof placed on him and unless the evidence adduced is of such a quality that no reasonable tribunal can accept, it ought to be accepted. The reason is that where evidence called by the plaintiff in a civil case is neither challenged nor contradicted, his onus of proof is discharged on a minimal of proof.” PER ARIWOOLA, JSC

DAMAGES-MEANING OF

“Damages are money claimed by or ordered to be paid to, a person as compensation for loss or injury. In other words, damages are the sum of money which a person wronged is entitled to receive from the wrongdoer as compensation for the wrong.” PER ARIWOOLA, JSC

BANKER/CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP-NATURE OF

“Generally, the relationship of a bank customer and a banker is contractual. In other words, a customer to a bank in relation to the business of banking is any person having an account with a bank or for whom a bank has agreed to collect items and includes a bank carrying an account with another bank.” PER ARIWOOLA, JSC

AWARD OF GENERAL DAMAGES-CIRCUMSTANCES THAT WOULD WARRANT INTERFERENCE

“Circumstances that would warrant interference with an award of general damages made by a trial court are:
1.If the court is satisfied that the trial Judge acted in the award of such damages, upon some wrong principle; or
2.That the amount awarded was so large or so small as to make it a completely erroneous assessment of the damages; or
3.Where a finding of the trial court is found to be perverse.” PER KEKERE-EKUN, JSC

WRONGFUL DISHONOUR OF CHEQUES -NATURE OF DAMAGES AWARDED THERETO

“Damages awarded in this class of claims is aggravated not only for the inconvenience caused the claimant but injury done to his reputation, credit, loss incurred following the wrongful dishonour of his cheque and for his overall anguish as well”. PER MUHAMMAD, JSC

GENERAL DAMAGES- AWARD OF-WHEN AN APPELLATE COURT CAN INTERFERE THEREWITH

“Where the trial judge ignores facts on record in arriving at the general damages he awards a successful plaintiff, an appellate court is duty bound to interfere by making the estimation the justice of the case demands based on the facts ignored by the trial judge.” PER MUHAMMAD, JSC

WRONGFUL DISHONOUR OF CHEQUES-DAMAGES A PLAINTIFF IS ENTITLED TO RECOVER THERETO

“It is settled law that in cases of breach of contract for wrongful dishonour of cheques (which are sui generis) damages are said to be “at large”. A successful plaintiff is entitled to recover under several heads of damages.” PER KEKERE-EKUN, JSC

DAMAGES-DISTINCTION BETWEEN GENERAL DAMAGES AND SPECIAL DAMAGES-HOW AWARDED

“General damages are damages that the law presumes follow from the type of wrong complained of and do not need to be specifically claimed. While special damages are damages that are alleged to have been sustained in the circumstances of a particular wrong. To be awardable, special damages must be specifically claimed and proved.” PER ARIWOOLA, JSC

DECISION OF A COURT-WHEN CAN BE PERVERSE

“A decision of a court is perverse when it ignores the facts or evidence before it which lapse when considered as a whole constitutes a miscarriage of justice. In such a case an appellate court is bound to interfere with such a decision and set it aside.” PER MUHAMMAD, JSC

AWARD OF DAMAGES BY THE TRIAL COURT-WHETHER AN APPELLATE COURT CAN INTERFERE THEREWITH

“It is not the business of the appellate court to interfere with general damages awarded by the trial court unless it is satisfied that the trial judge had acted upon some wrong principle in the award of such damages or that the amount awarded was so large or so small as to make it a completely erroneous assessment of the damages.” PER MUHAMMAD, JSC

GENERAL DAMAGES- PROOF OF

“On the general damages claimed, it needs not be specifically pleaded. It arises from inference of law and need not be proved by evidence. It suffices once generally averred in the pleadings.” PER ARIWOOLA, JSC

WRONGFUL DISHONOUR OF CHEQUES-WHETHER A PARTY IS ENTITLED TO PROOF ACTUAL DAMAGE OR LOSS

“A trader is entitled to recover substantial damages for the wrongful dishonour of his cheque without pleading and proving actual damage or loss.” PER KEKERE-EKUN, JSC

AWARD OF DAMAGES -WHEN AN APPELLATE COURT WILL ENTERTAIN AN APPEAL THEREON

“The principle remains that an appellate court will not entertain an appeal against the award of general damages unless it is shown that such award was so low or too excessive as to amount to an erroneous estimate having regard to the evidence.” PER MUHAMMAD, JSC

CASES CITED

Ademe vs. Dantunbu (1994) 2 NACR 74Agbanelo v. Union Bank of Nigeria (2000) 4 SC (pt. 1) 233 at 245Akintola vs Solana (1986) 2 NWLR (Pt.24) 598Balogun vs N.B.N. Ltd. (1978) 3 SC (Reprint) 111 @ 117 lines 19 – 24, 35 – 38 & 118 lines 4 -11Balogun vs U.B.A. Ltd. (1992 6 NWLR (Pt.247) 336 @ 349Bamgbegbin vs Oriare (2009) 13 NWLR (Pt.1158) 370Boshali vs. Allied Commercial Exporters (1961) 1 All NLR 917 at 921;Bourhil vs. Young (1943) AC 92;Dumez Ltd v. Ogboli (1972)3 SC 196Elijah Oladeii Kosile vs. Amuba Olaniyi Folarin (1989) NWLR (Pt 107) 1; (1989) 4 SC (Pt 1) 150;Flint vs. Lovel (1935) 1 K.B. 354;Ide Chemists Limited vs. National Bank of Nigeria Limited (1976 – 1984) 3 NBLR 111 at 118.Ifeanyi-Chukwu Co Ltd v. Akhigbe (1999) 7 SC (pt 1) 1Imah v. Okogbe (1993) 12 SCNJ 57lyere vs Bendel Feed & Flour Mills Ltd (2008) 18 NWLR (Pt.1119) 300;(2008) 12 SCM (Pt.l) 66 at 96James vs. Mid Motors (Nig.) Limited (1978) 12Marine Management Associates INC & anor v. NMA (2012) 12 SC (pt 11) 141Marine Management v. N. M. A. (2012) 12 SCNJ 128 at 159N.E.P.A. v. Ososanya (2004) 5 NWLR (pt 867) 601Nigeria Bottling Co Ltd v. Ngonadi (1985) 1 NWLR (Pt 4) 74NBCI vs Integrated Gas Ltd. & Anor (1998) 8 NWLR (Pt.613) 119 @131 D – ENigeria Deposit Insurance Corporation (Liquidator of Allied Bank of Nigeria Plc) vs. Okem Enterprises Limited & 1 Ors. (2004) 10 NWLR (Pt 880) 107; (2004) 50 WRN 1 at 108, (2004) 4 SC (Pt 11) 77Odogu v. AG Federation (1996) 6 NWLR (pt 456) 508Onaga v. Micho & Co (1961) 1 ALL NLR 101 at 105 – 106Shell Petroleum Development Co. (Nig) Ltd vs. Teibo & Ors (1996) 4 NWLR (Pt.445) 657 at 680;S.O. Nwabuoku vs. P.N. Ottih (1961) 1 All NLR 487;U.B.A. Ltd. vs Mudashiru O. Ademuyiwa (1999) 11 NWLR (Pt.628) 570 @ 591 A – CUgwe Ukuha & Ors. vs. Golden Okoronkwo (1972) 1 All NLR (Pt 11) 100 at 105Ukoma V. Nicol (1962) NSCC (vol 2) 73Yalaju Amaye Vs AREC (1990) NWLR (Pt.145) 422Williams vs. Daily Times of Nigeria Limited (1990) 1 SC 23; (1990) LPELR 3487 (SC)

STATUTES REFERRED TO

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT