Disable Preloader

CaseLaw

Chilkied Security services & Dog Farms V. Schlumberger (2018) CLR 4(f) (SC)

Judgement delivered on 27th day of April 2018

Brief

  • Defamation and Defamatory words

Facts

This is an appeal against the judgment of the Court of Appeal, Port Harcourt Division delivered on 13/4/2006 setting aside the judgment of the High Court of Rivers State sitting at Port Harcourt delivered on 28/11/97.

The appellant herein, a limited liability company, instituted an action before the High Court of Rivers State, seeking N10 million damages for libel and an order of injunction against the respondents. The appellant is a security company engaged by the 1st respondent to provide security guards for its various properties, including its office and warehouse, residential estate and youth corpers' residence at different locations within Port Harcourt. As a result of incessant complaints of stealing and breaking into apartments in the staff quarters at the residential estate, its contract was terminated. It was the appellant's contention at the trial Court that the respondents by their letter dated 2/3/92 titled "Threats from the manager of Chilkied Security Services," published libel against it to the following persons:

  • i
    The Commissioner of Police Rivers State, Mr.O.O. Onogie,
  • ii
    The Police,
  • iii
    The Chief Security Officer at the University of Science and Technology, Port Harcourt, and
  • iv
    The general public.

It was its further contention that the publication was actuated by malice and for the purpose of discrediting and ruining its business. The appellant also claimed that as a result of the libel, it had lost the custom of 21 companies, whose names were pleaded in paragraph 20 of its Amended Statement of Claim. The respondents filed an Amended statement of Defence wherein they raised the defences of qualified privilege and justification. At the trial, the appellant called three witnesses while the respondents called two witnesses in their defence. Documentary evidence was also tendered and relied upon. At the conclusion of the trial, the learned trial Judge entered judgment in the appellant's favour. He awarded the sum of N3,500,000.00 as general damages for libel and granted the order of injunction. The respondents were dissatisfied with the judgment and appealed to the lower Court.

In a considered judgment delivered on 13/4/2006, the appeal was allowed and the judgment of the trial Court was set aside.

The appellant is aggrieved by the decision and has appealed to this Court.

Issues

  • 1
    Whether the Justices of the Court of Appeal properly considered the effect...
  • Read More