Joseph Ibidapo Vs Lufthansa Airlines (1997)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report

WALI, J.S.C.

By a Writ of Summons filed in the Lagos High Court, the plaintiff Mr. Joseph Ibidapo claims against the defendant, Lufthansa Airlines as follows:-

“The plaintiff’s claim is for negligence in the care and custody of plaintiff’s baggage containing an IBM typewriter delivered to the defendant at Lagos for delivery in Frankfurt-Germany but which said baggage remains undelivered despite repeated demands. The plaintiff also claims in the alternative against the defendant as bailees for reward for non-delivery of their baggage and in the further alternative on contract. The plaintiff also claim damages for loss of use of his typewriter.”

Parties filed and exchanged pleadings in which issues were joined. The most relevant of the plaintiff’s Statement of Claim are paragraphs 13 – 18 which I reproduce hereunder.

13. The defendant was at all material times under a duty as a bailee for reward to re-deliver the plaintiff’s baggage and despite repeated demands the defendant, has failed to deliver the plaintiff’s baggage in Germany or at all. The plaintiff will at the trial rely on the defendant’s letters to establish non-delivery.

PARTICULARS OF BREACH OF DUTY AS BAILEES FOR REWARD

The defendant having possession of the plaintiff’s typewriter as bailee for reward failed to exercise reasonable care while in custody of the plaintiff’s baggage by failing to put same on board it’s flight to Germany.

14. Further and in the alternative, the defendant was under a contractual obligation to re-deliver the plaintiff’s baggage but has failed to do so despite repeated demands. (At the trial of this action the plaintiff shall refer to and rely on his passenger air-ticket and baggage tags for their full terms and effect.)

PARTICULARS OF BREACH OF CONTRACT

Securely by charging a rate and accepting the plaintiff’s baggage for carriage and delivery the defendant undertook to safely and securely carry the plaintiff’s baggage between Lagos and Frankfurt and to re-deliver same on demand. Despite repeated demands by the plaintiff the defendant has failed to re-deliver the plaintiff’s baggage.

15. The plaintiff will contend at the trial that the defendant was a common carrier of the plaintiff’s baggage and the defendant is guilty of a breach of it’s duty as such common carrier.

PARTICULARS OF SPECIAL DAMAGE

1. $1,785 U.S. Dollars being cost of the typewriter purchased in the United States.
2. The equivalent prevailing cost of the IBM typewriter in Nigeria.
3. In the alternative the plaintiff demands a replacement of his typewriter. .

PARTICULARS OF BREACH OF DUTY AS COMMON CARRIER

i. The defendant accepted to carry for reward the plaintiff’s baggage on it’s Lagos flight bound for Frankfurt and to deliver on demand the aforesaid luggage.

ii. The defendant as aforesaid failed to deliver said Luggage in Frankfurt or at all.

16. Further and in the second alternative the plaintiff contend that the defendant was negligent in the care and custody of the plaintiff’s Luggage which negligence resulted in the loss and or non-delivery/mis-delivery of the aforesaid luggage.

The plaintiff will contend at the trial that the defendant owed them a duty of care which duty was breached by the defendant by reason of non-delivery of the plaintiff’s baggage.

Particulars of Negligence