BEST LAW REPORT SUBSCRIPTION PRICE!!

  • Mosfreg Ventures Ltd v. Minister of Internal Affairs
  • 147
  • 2003-03-24
  • ₦ 200
  • Buy Now

Mosfreg Ventures Ltd v. Minister of Internal Affairs

MOSFREG VENTURES LIMITED

V

1.      MINISTER OF INTERNAL AFFAIRS

2.      CONTROLLER GENERAL OF PRISONS

COURT OF APPEAL

( KADUNA DIVISION )

ISA AYO SALAMI, JCA ( Presided and Read the Lead Judgment )

RABIU DANLAMI MUHAMMAD, JCA

MAHMUD MOHAMMED, JCA

CA/K/130/99

THURSDAY, 12TH JULY, 2001

CONTRACT - Breach of contract - Fundamental breach - Remedy available to the innocent party

CONTRACT - Breach of contract - Notification clause - When may avail a party in breach - When not

CONTRACT - Breach of contract - When may be sued for

CONTRACT - Repudiation of contract - Effect of on notification clause Whether party repudiating the contract is expected to give termination notice

CONTRACT - Rescission of contract - When can be done

Issues:

1.            Whether the appellant was in breach of the terms of the lease agreement (exhibit G).

2.            Assuming (but not conceding) that the appellant was in breach of the lease agreement, was the appellant not entitled to one year’s notice before the lease could be terminated.

Facts:

The respondent by a deed of lease dated 26th August 1993, leased the land in dispute to the appellant for a period of 30 years for building of a modern shopping complex for the use and training of the inmates of the Borstal Institution. Contrary to express provision of the specification of the building, the appellant allocated shop spaces to members of public with the connivance of the principal of Borstal Institution, who endorsed the letters of allocation. The principal of Borstal Institution was actually appointed to supervise the execution of the agreement to ensure strict adherence to the terms of the lease.

The 1st respondent consequently terminated the deed of lease. The appellant therefore instituted this action for a declaration that 1st respondent’s purported termination of the lease agreement was illegal, null and void, and damages for wrongful termination.

At the conclusion of trial, the trial court dismissed the appellant’s claim. Dissatisfied, the appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal.