CaseLaw
Shell Pet. Dev. Co V.Farah (1995) CLR 4(C) (CA)
Brief
Facts
The case concerned an oil blow out which occurred in July 1970 from a well known as Bomu well 11 owned and operated by the Shell Petroleum Development Company Nigeria Limited. The blow out lasted for several weeks during which time, crude hydrocarbon, sulfur and effluent toxic substances were violently emitted in dense fountains. The emissions formed a thick layer over the surface of the adjoining fountains. The emissions formed a thick layer over the surface of the adjoining land, destroying farm lands crops and economic trees and natural vegetation of the impacted areas with the resultant desertification of the impacted area of about 607 hectares belonging to several families in K. Dere town now in Gokana/Tai/Eleme Local Government Area of Rivers State. The respondents as plaintiffs comprising five families who own 13.245 hectares of the impacted area then in a representative capacity took out a writ of summons dated 30th May, 1989 against the appellant company as defendant for damages. After the order for pleadings, the respondents delivered a statement of claim, the appellant statement of defence followed by the respondent’s reply to the appellant’s statement of defence.
Appellants conceded that there was a blow out in 1970 and that in respect of damage to crops, economic trees and structures caused thereby, it paid £22,000 to all individual claimants. It also entered negotiations with representatives of the affected families to whom £1,000 was paid for damage to the land. In addition and at the request of the respondents, the appellant also rehabilitated the land. In this regard experts were commissioned led by Dw2 to investigate the extent of damage to the soil. The exercise lasted four years from which a report Exh D 1 was produced. D.W 1 stated that between 1975 and the date the action was filed, the polluted land had been rehabilitated and put to farming. In 1990, when litigation commenced, DW2 at the request of the appellant company reassessed the rehabilitation exercise and submitted a report admitted as Exh D2 It confirmed that the land had been substantially rehabilitated.:
Appellants thus claimed that it had discharged its obligation to respondents and moreover, the blow out occurred in 1970 and the respondents action commenced in 1989 - 14 years after - so it was statute barred.
However, since there was conflicting expert reports from both sides, respondents counsel moved the court below to appoint two referees to look into the matter. The application was granted. Their report was subsequently filed. Thereafter, one of the referees gave evidence and tendered their report as Exh 5 and also tendered a bill for their work - Exh 6.Page1
The trial Judge found in favour of the respondent and awarded a total sum of N4,621,307.00 and awarded N515,800 to the referees for their fees to be borne equally by the parties. He also awarded N10,000 costs.
Appellants aggrieved, appealed