Madam B. O. Shobogun V. Raimi Sanni & Anor (1974)
LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report
FATAYI-WILLIAMS, JSC.
The defendants, an electronics and tele-communications company, by letter dated 29th February, 1968, written as a follow-up to an earlier letter dated 22nd February, 1968, (Ex. 31) submitted to the Deputy Director, Department of Posts and Telecommunications, Ministry of Communications, Lagos, quotations in respect of multi-channel radio-telephone links which the Ministry proposed to install between Lagos and Calabar and between Ogoja and Calabar, and also in respect of a proposed low-power SSB point-to-point simplex radiotelephone over the same paths. The contents of the letter (Ex. 8) read – “We have the pleasure to refer to our enquires of last month and submit as per attached QUOTATIONS Schedules our quotations in respect of the proposed multi-channel radio-telephone links between Lagos and Calabar or between Ogoja and Calabar and also in respect of the proposed low-power SSB point-to-point simplex radio-telephone over the same paths.
We wish to say that we have devoted much thought and consideration to your technical requirements both as related to costs and quality of equipment and we are satisfied that our selection of the various types of equipment is highly competitive, we therefore have no doubt that you will find each item of the Equipment and Systems offered very satisfactory. We have endeavoured to quote for alternative SYSTEMS, in the hope that you will not fail to find one that will meet your specific requirements and specification.
We have also described each of the major equipment in some detail, on the attached schedule, under various headings. Comprehensive technical performance specifications of each equipment offered are readily available in the descriptive leaflets contained in this folder. We shall be quite happy to supply further information on any aspect of these quotations in anticipation that you will be disposed to grant us the opportunity to be of service to your Department. We must explain that the c.i.f. prices quoted include only sea freight an insurance but do not include customs duty. Yours truly, (Sgd.) S. B. Obassa.” (The underlining is ours). Attached to the above letter are the quotations for each of the three systems referred to therein. As quotation in respect of the Ogoja-Calabar system (referred to as System 3) is not relevant to these proceedings, we shall say no more about this particular system. The cost of the items of equipment quoted as System 1 was £28,520: 0: 0d while the cost of System 2 which is quoted as an alternative to System 1 is £26,908: 0: 0d. In addition, the cost of the installation of either of these two systems together with System 3, less transportation, was quoted as £1,350: 0: 0d. Incidentally, the above quotation for system 1 was also attached to the earlier letter dated 22nd February, 1968, which the defendants had also written to the Deputy Director.
The Deputy Director replied by letter dated 30th May, 1968, (Ex. 1) to the earlier letter of 22nd February, 1968, as follows:- “Dear Sir, HF Radiocommunication Equipment In reply to your letter reference SB/CA.34-144 of 22nd February, 1968, I wish to inform uyou that you are requested to supply the under mentioned HF radiocommunication equipment with ancillaries within 6 to 8 weeks delivery period. The equipment are to be installed by you within two weeks of delivery.” After listing all the items of equipment offered earlier by the defendants in his letter (Ex. 31) as System 1 and System 3 respectively, the letter ended as follows:- “2. The Controller of Stores will issue and forward to you Local Purchase Order for the above-mentioned items. 3. Please treat as urgent and keep me informed of the position. Yours faithfully, (Sgd.) I. Q. A. Lasode Deputy Director (Planning).”
A copy of this letter was then forwarded to the Controller of Stores, P & T. Headquarters, Lagos, with the following endorsement:- “Please issue L. P. O. to the Telecommunications Manager, Maiden Electronics, Lagos, for the purchase of the above-mentioned h. f., radio equipment.” (The underlining is also ours). On 4th June, 1968, the Local Purchase Order (Ex. 6), which was later attached to the payment Voucher No. 26 of December, 1968, (also admitted in evidence as Ex. 6), was duly prepared in favour of the defendants. Attached to this L.P.O. is a list containing all the equipment listed under Systems 1 and 3. Incidentally the cost of the items of equipment used in System 3 (the Calabar-Ogoja link) which has been satisfactorily installed and commissioned, and for which payment has been made, is £840: 0: 0d. The present proceedings, therefore, do not concern System 3.
On the receipt of the Local Purchase Order (No. NR/89/68-9 of 4th June, 1968, in respect of Order No. 381018), the defendants placed an order for the equipment. Meanwhile, the Assistant Director (Planning) wrote to the defendants about the equipment on 4th September, 1968. The letter, (Ex. 16), reads:- “Calabar -Lagos Ogoja H. F. Terminals The receipt of your letter ref. SB/CA.34-1238 informing us of the cost of airfreighting Radio Equipment for the above terminals is hereby acknowledged and the amount of £1,450 involved noted.
We wish to remind you that according to your letter ref. SB/CA. 34-114 of February 22nd, 1968, a delivery time for the equipment of 6/8 weeks was quoted. In our letter to you ref. P.020/ of May 30, 1968, instructing you to supply the equipment, it was our hope that you will adhere strictly to the delivery period which you had quoted earlier and, the equipment would have been delivered at the end of July 1968 at the latest. We are now in the first week of September, 1968. You may like to know that the government of the South-Eastern State is getting extremely anxious about the delay in installing the Calabar-Ogoja-Lagos H. F. Links and I am sure you will appreciate the anxiety of that government and ensure that further delay in delivering the equipment is avoided at all cost. (Sgd.) P.S. Sahni Asst. Director (Planning)” (The underlining is ours.
Later, Mr. Sahni, (the Asst. Director, Planning), wrote again to the defendants on 30th November, 1968. The contents of this letter (Ex. 19) are as follows:- “Lagos – Calabar H. F. Link This is to confirm that payment will be made as agreed in my letter No. P. 020 of May 30, 1968, when we take delivery of the equipment for the above link which I presume have arrived from the United Kingdom. This matter was discussed with Mr. Ghobadia and Mr. Lasode.
The equipment are as listed in the Radio Communications Ltd. Packing Note No. CP/10444 of 20th November, 1968. I may add it here that payment for the installation and commissioning will be made on satisfactory completion of the contract. (Sgd.) P. S. Sahni Asst. Director, Planning.” (The underlining is ours). Pursuant to the above letter, the defendants, on 2nd December, 1968, wrote to the Deputy Director (Planning), Post and Telecommunications, about payment for the equipment. The letter, (Ex. 32), reads – “Lagos-Calabar H. F. Link Further to your letters reference No. P.020 of May 30th, 1968, and No 020/Vol. III/421 of 30th November, 1968, we will be grateful if you will make payment for the above equipment, on your delivery and acceptance by you, to the United Bank for Africa, Oba Akran Avenue, Ikeja.
We will be very grateful if you will confirm your compliance with this instruction in writing. Thanking you very much for your co-operation in this matter. Yours faithfully, (Sgd.) Anofi S. Guobadia Managing Director.” To this letter the Ministry replied in a letter dated 3rd December, 1968 (Ex. 33) as follows:- “Lagos-Calabar H. F. Link Your Letter No. AG/CA 31-1212 of the 2nd December, 1968.
I have to refer to your above letter and to advise you that your request to have the payment made to your bank, the United Bank for Africa, Oba Akran Avenue, Ikeja will be complied with any time this is to be made in connection with the delivery and acceptance of the above equipment. Yours faithfully, (Sgd.) S. O. Olusemo for Contracting Officer and Deputy Director.” The equipment duly arrived in Nigeria in December, 1968. The list of equipment which arrived, as shown in Invoices Nos. M0056 and M0057 of 10th December, 1968, (Ex. 6), did not include the “Racal HF Double Diversity Receiving Terminal” selected in System 1. Instead the “Racal Single ended Receiving Terminal”, offered earlier as an alternative under System 2 was substituted.
Nevertheless, the equipment, on arrival, were, as shown in the Invoices referred to above, collected in a P. & T. lorry and “Received in good condition” by an official of the Ministry of Communications. We wish to point out, at this juncture, that the list in Packing Note No. CP/10444, (see Ex. 9), referred to in the letter, (Ex. 19), from Mr. Sahni to the defendants includes only the “Single Receiving Terminal” and not “Double Diversity Receiving Terminal” ordered in System 1. On the receipt of the equipment listed in the Invoices, the Ministry, on 20th December, 1968, prepared a Payment Voucher (Ex. 6) for £26,900.
The detailed description of the articles for which payment is being made by virtue of the Payment Voucher reads- “To payment of Telecommunications Equipment supplied to the Post and Telecommunications Department by Maiden Electronics Works Ltd. , Lagos, vide Invoice Nos. M00
Other Citation: (1974) LCN/1857(SC)
