MUJAID V. IBEDC : On whether party who fails to prove his claim is entitled to damages. An insight into the decision of the Court of Appeal therein.
Citation: (2021)12 NWLR PT. 1791 AT 543.
PARTIES IN FULL: MESSR BALOGUN OLOYEDE MUJAID V. IBADAN ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION COMPANY [IBEDC] BUSINESS MANAGER [IBEDC] CHALLENGE BUSINESS HUB,ILORIN BUSINESS MANAGER [IBEDC] ITA ALAMU BUSINESS HUB, ILORIN MRS. VICTORIA A. AROJESU
Courtesy: Moruff O. Balogun, Esq.
Summary of fact:
The appellant commenced an action against the respondents by way of originating summons for enforcement of his fundamental rights. He asserted that though he was not owing on electricity bill of charge, the respondents disconnected electricity supply to his building without giving him the required statutory notice and carted away his electricity supply cables without justification. He asserted that the respondents’ actions went beyond their statutory duty, denied him his fundamental right to the enjoyment of his personal property, and subjected him to ridicule within his community. Consequently, the appellant sought declaratory and injunctive reliefs and special damages.
Attached to the appellant’s affidavit in support of the originating summons were documents marked as exhibits MOB1, MOB2, MOB3, and MOBS. The exhibits, however, showed that the landlord of the building disconnected from the respondent’s electricity network was the aggrieved customer of the 1st respondent and that the appellant merely served as a solicitor to the landlord in exchanging correspondences with the respondents.
The respondents also filed a counter affidavit to the appellant’s affidavit. Because of the conflicting facts in the affidavits of the parties, the trial court ordered the deponents to the affidavits to appear in court for cross examination. The appellant testified as PW1 and he was cross-examined. On the other hand, the 4th respondent and another person testified as DW1 and DW2, but only DW1 was cross-examined.
The evidence presented at trial was that the appellant’s landlord applied to the respondents for the connection of the building occupied by the appellant to the electricity network of the 1st respondent. But prior to obtaining the 1st respondent’s approval, the building was connected to the 1st respondents electricity network.
The appellant stated that the connection was done by a person who the landlord claimed was an official of the respondents, but who the appellant did not pay for the service rendered. On the other hand, there was no evidence that the appellant had at any time paid electricity bill to the respondent to qualify him as a legitimate user and customer of the 1st respondent. Also, there was no documentary evidence that the landlord authorized the appellant to institute the action on his behalf.
At the conclusion of hearing, the trial court found that the building occupied by the appellant was illegally connected to the electricity network of the 1st respondent, and held that the respondents were empowered to disconnect the electricity supply to the building without any notice to the appellant. The trial court further held that the appellant did not establish that he is a customer of the 1st respondent or that the respondents owed him any duty to necessitate the filing of the action against them. In the end, the trial court held that the respondents did not violate any of the fundamental rights of the appellant. Although the trial court held that the appellant’s action failed, it awarded the sum of N200,000 in favour of the appellant.
Dissatisfied, the appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal. In response, the respondents raised a preliminary objection in their brief of argument by which they argued that the appellant’s notice of appeal was fundamentally defective because the complaint in all five grounds in the notice alleged both errors in law and misdirection in fact. They argued that the defect in the grounds of appeal effectively rendered the grounds incompetent and liable to be struck out.
The appellant filed a reply brief of argument by which he urged the Court of Appeal to disregard the respondent’s preliminary objection, and hold that his notice of appeal was competent.
In determining the appeal, the Court of Appeal considered the provisions of section 33(1) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 as amended, which provides as follows: No movable property or any interest in an immovable property shall be taken possession of compulsorily and no right over or interest in any such property shall be acquired compulsorily in any part of Nigeria except in the manner and for purpose prescribed by law that among other things.”
Held :Unanimously dismissing the appeal.
On whether party who fails to prove his claim is entitled to damages- In any claim for damages, a plaintiff must succeed in establishing the claim vis-à-vis the relief thereof. Where a plaintiff fails to prove the claim with some credible evidence, the relief for damages must naturally fail. In the instant case, the appellant failed to establish the claim for breach of fundamental rights on the preponderance of evidence. So the appellant ought not to have been awarded the N200,000 special damages by the trial court.
On who can sue to enforce contract- Only a party to a valid contract can sue to enforce it. A contract cannot be enforced by a person who is not a party thereto, even if made for the benefit of that person. In the instant case, there was no contract between the appellant and the respondents. It was the appellant’s landlord who applied for the connection of the building to the 1st respondent’s electricity network.
There was no evidence that the appellant applied for the connection of the building to the 1st respondent’s electricity network or paid electricity bill to the 1st respondent to qualify him as a legitimate user and customer of the 1st respondent.
There was no evidence that his landlord authorized him to sue on his behalf. Thus, the rightful person who could have instituted any claim in regard to the subject matter of the instant action was the appellant’s landlord.
On constitutional right to property- By virtue of section 33(1) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 as amended, no movable property or any interest in an immovable property shall be taken possession of compulsorily and no right over or interest in any such property shall be acquired compulsorily in any part of Nigeria except in the manner and for purpose prescribed by law. In the instant case, the applicant did not establish that he had a service line which was confiscated by the respondents.
On what locus standi denotes and court process in which claimant should disclose locus standi – “Locus standi” denotes the fundamental legal capacity to initiate an action (proceeding) in a court of law. Thus, for a person to institute a legal action, he must show that he has sufficient interest in the subject of the action and that his civil rights and/or obligations have been or are in danger of being infringed upon. Fundamentally, it is the originating process (the writ of summons and the statement of claim, or the originating summons/motion where same is filed) that ought to show whether the plaintiff or claimant has a locus standi to sue.
On when preliminary objection must be supported by affidavit- If a preliminary objection is not based exclusively on law, but also on the facts of the ease, the burden rests on the objector to justify the objection by adducing facts in an affidavit. The objector, in that circumstance, stands the risk of his objection being dismissed if he fails to satisfy the court of the facts he has relied upon.
On when preliminary objection to an appeal should be filed and when not- A preliminary objection should only be filed against the hearing of an appeal and not against one or more grounds of appeal. Where there are grounds of appeal that can sustain an appeal, a preliminary objection ought not to be filed. Rather, a motion of notice should be filed against the offending grounds of appeal.
Courtesy: Moruff O. Balogun Esq. Ijebu Ode, Ogun State. 08052871414. 09121207712 [WhatsApp]
