M.T. Mamman V. A.A. Salaudeen (2005)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report

W.S.N. ONNOGHEN, J.S.C.

This is an appeal against the judgment of the Kaduna Division of the Court of Appeal delivered on 9th May, 2000.

The respondent is a customer of Trade Bank Plc., Kaduna Branch, where the appellant was a senior banker. Respondent, in the course of doing business with the said bank obtained credit to enhance his business transactions, which he later failed to repay. Upon pressure being mounted by the bank to recover the facility, respondent stated in writing that his inability to repay was due to, the fact that the appellant took part of the facility as “compulsory bribe”. Appellant felt aggrieved and sued the respondent at the High Court of Kaduna State, Kaduna claiming exemplary damages, an apology and injunction for libel on the ground that the allegation was false and malicious and that the respondent knew it to be false.

The libel is alleged to have been published to the manager of Trade Bank Plc., the employer of the appellant. The respondent in his defence admitted making or authorising the said publications but denied that the words were published out of malice or spite but that the words were true in fact and were published on a privileged occasion.

There was no reply to the statement of defence since an application for extension of time to file one after evidence had been concluded and the defendant’s counsel addressed the court , was refused by the learned trial Judge in a ruling delivered on 18th December, 1995. The trial court however, gave judgment in favour of the appellant resulting in an appeal by the respondent to the Court of Appeal, which set aside the judgment of the trial court. The present appeal is against that judgment.

It is pertinent to mention the fact that after the respondent had appealed to the Court of Appeal, appellant attempted to amend his statement of claim which application was refused by the Court of Appeal on the ground, inter alia, that it was too late in the day to allow same. That apart, some of respondents’ grounds of appeal were on the issues which the amendments sought to remedy.

Learned counsel for bo th parties has filed their briefs of argument which have been duly served on either party.

In his brief of arguments, learned counsel for the appellant, (Layi Babatunde, Esq. identified five (5) issues for determination. These are: –

“(i) Whether having regard to the principles of law governing the amendment of pleadings as laid down by this Honourable Court in several decided cases, the lower court exercised its discretion judiciously when it refused to grant the appellant leave to amend his statement of claim (Grounds 23, 24 & 25 of the amended notice of appeal);

(ii) whether having regard to the state of the pleadings, the law and the evidence adduced at the trial, the Court of Appeal was right to have overturned the clear findings of the trial Judge that exhibits 4, 5, & 6 were defamatory and that they were published out of spite and malevolence (Grounds 1, 2, 3, 4, 12 & 13 of the amended notice of appeal);

(iii) whether the lower court correctly stated the principles of law governing the defence of qualified privilege and whether the court was right to have upheld the defence of qualified privilege in the circumstance; (Grounds 5, 6,7 and, 9);

(iv) whether the court below did not misdirect itself on the law concerning the following:

(a) When a claim for libel is actionable per se;

(b) Assessment of damages in claims for libel;