n Compulaw - 1st Indigenous Digital Law Library
Disable Preloader

CaseLaw

Oruboko V. Oruene (1996) CLR 3(g) (CA)

Judgement delivered on 12th March, 1996

Brief

  • Findings of fact by trial court
  • Evidence on facts not pleaded
  • Allegation of crime
  • Addresses

Facts

The respondent as plaintiff sued the appellants as defendants claiming the sum of N25.000.00 as special and general damages for his concrete blocks damaged by the appellants.

The respondent claimed that he stacked 10,000 cement blocks which he purchased on his land. He engaged the services of a bricklayer who testified as 2nd P.W. for the construction of a building on the said land. 2nd P.W. dug foundation for the building. Few days later, 2nd P.W. came to inform the respondent that on getting to the construction site he discovered and found the cement blocks lo have been damaged by certain persons in his absence. In accordance with the custom in the area, the respondent caused a proclamation to be made and made a payment of N5.00 to the 1st appellant for that purpose, but nobody came forward to admit damaging the blocks.

The respondent was later arrested by the police upon a complaint by the appellants that he trespassed on their land. In the course of police investigations, it was discovered that it was the appellants who damaged the respondent's cement blocks. The appellants were subsequently charged to the Magistrate's Court and convicted. The appellants appealed against the judgment which was still pending before the present action was instituted. Later, the appellants went to the respondent and begged for forgiveness. The respondent told them to pay for the cost of the cement blocks damaged, but the meeting was deadlocked. The appellants on their part denied ever damaging the respondent's cement blocks or ever admitting to pay for the cost of same in pursuance of settlement moves.

At the conclusion of the trial, the learned trial Judge granted the respondent's claim and awarded N8.000.00 and N10,000.00 as special and general damages respectively. The appellants were dissatisfied with the judgment and appealed to the Court of Appeal.

Issues

  • 1
    Whether the trial court was right in believing the...
Read More