Home » WACA Cases » Central Province Farmers Group, Ltd. & Anor V. Bank of British West Africa, Ltd. & Anor (1938) LJR-WACA

Central Province Farmers Group, Ltd. & Anor V. Bank of British West Africa, Ltd. & Anor (1938) LJR-WACA

Central Province Farmers Group, Ltd. & Anor V. Bank of British West Africa, Ltd. & Anor (1938)

LawGlobal Hub Judgment Report – West African Court of Appeal

Consolidated suits, complicated case tried without pleadings—Claim against Bank for difference in price of Cocoa hypothecated by 1st Plaintiffs-2nd Defendants joined, also 2nd Plaintiff—Counter-claim by 2nd Defendants against 2nd Plaintiff for damages for breach of contracts—Claim by 2nd Plaintiff against 2nd Respondents-1st Plaintiffs’ claim against 1st Defendants dismissed, small part only of 1st Plaintiffs’ claim against 2nd Defendants allowed, on counterclaim 2nd Defendants recover judgment against 2nd Plaintiff, whose claim in the second suit is dismissed—Appeals by both Plaintiffs.

Held: (1) Claim of 1st plaintiffs against 1st defendants being founded on contract and there being no contract between those parties, claim misconceived and appeal dismissed.

  1. On 1st plaintiffs’ claim against 2nd defendants, finding of fact of trial Judge upheld and appeal dismissed.
  2. Trial of the issues upon the counterclaim unsatisfactory for the following reasons :—
  1. The case was so complicated that pleadings were desirable.
  2. Neither in the counterclaim nor in the opening of counsel was it disclosed whether the claim was for special or general damages.
  3. The explanation of how the amount claimed, viz : £3,800, was arrived at, was unsatisfactory.
  4. The notice of counterclaim referred to the wrong agreement.
  5. A vital document was not produced.
  6. Evidence of special damage was inadequate.

Further—doubt thrown on correctness of trial Judge’s. finding of fact on important issues—Issues upon counterclaim remitted to be reheard upon pleadings.

(4) Trial of claim in second suit of 2nd plaintiff against 2nd defendants also unsatisfactory for the following reasons:—

  1. A vital document was not produced.
  2. No clear separate judgment was given upon it, but it was treated as a set-off against the larger sum due on the counterclaim in the first suit.
  3. In the Appeal Court plaintiffs’ counsel said he had sued the wrong defendant.
See also  Matthew Olajide Bamgbose V. John Bankole Daniel & Ors (1954) LJR-WACA

Claim remitted to be reheard upon pleadings.

More Posts

Section 47 EFCC Act 2004: Short Title

Section 47 EFCC Act 2004 Section 47 of the EFCC Act 2004 is about Short Title. This Act may be cited as the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (Establishment,

Section 46 EFCC Act 2004: Interpretation

Section 46 EFCC Act 2004 Section 46 of the EFCC Act 2004 is about Interpretation. In this Act – Interpretation “Commission” means the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission established

Section 45 EFCC Act 2004: Savings

Section 45 EFCC Act 2004 Section 45 of the EFCC Act 2004 is about Savings. The repeal of the Act specified in section 43 of this Act shall not

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

LawGlobal Hub is your innovative global resource of law and more. We ensure easy accessibility to the laws of countries around the world, among others