Sadiku Ogungbesan V. Kajero & Ors (1944)

LawGlobal Hub Judgment Report – West African Court of Appeal

Damage to cult property by members of the cult—Criminal proceeding, followed by action for tort—Practice where Defence submits there is no case to answer, at close of Plaintiff’s case.

Facts

Plaintiff sued Defendants for special and general damages for malicious injuries to Iledi (Osugbo House) the property of the Cult. At the close of his case, it was submitted for Defendants that there was no case to answer, whereupon the Judge dismissed the action on the ground that they had an interest in that property and that the evidence pointed solely that they had made a forcible entry after having been locked out.

Plaintiff’s evidence was that the Iledi could only be entered when there was a meeting and only members could attend ; that he let Defendants attend ; also that material damage had been done for which criminal proceedings had been taken. The Judge seemed to regard the claim as one for damages for forcible entry.

Held

that Plaintiff had made out a prima facie case of damage to property and that Defendants should have been called upon to make their defence to that case.

Held also, that the tort was actionable without proof that the damage had been done maliciously and that previous criminal proceedings in which compensation might have been awarded were no bar to the action for tort.

A kinlolu Akodu v. V es ufu 0 ntidiji, 8 N.L. R.55, distinguished. A duke and another v. A iyelabola (then unreported, now at 8 W.A.C.A. 43) referred to on the Court’s duties upon a submission of ” no case to answer “.

The costs already incurred and to be incurred at the further hearing in the Court below will be in the discretion of the trial Judge at the further hearing.