- F. A. T. B. Ltd. vs. Partnership Investment Co. Ltd.
- ₦ 200
F. A. T. B. Ltd. vs. Partnership Investment Co. Ltd.
FIRST AFRICAN TRUST BANK LTD.
PARTNERSHIP INVESTMENT COMPANY LIMITED
SUPREME COURT OF
IDRIS LEGBO KUTIGI, JSC (
UTHMAN MOHAMMED, JSC
ANTHONY IKECHUKWU IGUH, JSC
AKINTOLA OLUFEMI EJIWUNMI, JSC ( Read the Lead Judgment )
DAHIRU MUSDAPHER, JSC
12TH DECEMBER, 2003
APPEAL - Appellate court - When may interfere with the judgment of
BANKING - Cheques drawn on a banker - When a banker is duty bound to
AND FINANCE - â€˜Draftâ€™ - Meaning of
BANKING AND FINANCE - Bill or note - Failure of consideration for which
same is signed - Effect of
BANKING AND FINANCE - Draft - Payee thereof - Duty of banker thereto
AND FINANCE - Promissory note - Payee who gave no consideration thereunder - Whether
has any claim as a creditor CONTRACT - Fraud - Instance and effect of on
COURT - Appellate court - When may interfere with the judgment of court
EVIDENCE - Presumption - Presumption of valuable consideration for
bills of exchange and promissory notes - Whether rebuttable
EVIDENCE - Proof - Bank loan transaction and or purchase of company
shares - How proved
EVIDENCE - Proof - Burden of proof of a particular fact - On whom lies
- Whether static
JUDGMENT AND ORDERS - Judgment of court below - When appellate court
may interfere therewith
PRECEDENT - U.B.A. vs. Ibhafidon and Logricom vs. UBN distinguished from the
instant case WORDS AND PHRASES - â€˜Draftâ€™ - Meaning of
Whether in the circumstances of this case the appellant
is obliged to pay the respondent on exhibit P1 when the Court of Appeal had
found that the pleadings and evidence of the appellant on want of value had not
been controverted nor seriously challenged by the respondent.
Whether the learned Justices of the Court of Appeal
were right in holding that the appellant had not sufficiently pleaded nor
proved the fraud which the appellant alleged in this case.
Whether in the absence of a written endorsement of the
condition precedent on the draft, the appellant is not permitted by law to
prove that the delivery of the draft was subject to a condition precedent and
whether the condition ought not to bind the respondent who is a nominee of
Alhaji Ladan with whom the appellant entered into an agreement for the supply
Whether the respondent was required by law to show that
it had given consideration for the draft before it could be paid.
Whether the alleged fraud had been particularised as
required by law and provedâ€.
appellant bank was approached by one Alhaji Tijani Ladan, sometimes in February
1995. The said Alhaji Ladan in the company of
Alhaji Abubakar of Damco Bureau De Change had a meeting with
the officials of the appellant. During that meeting the visitors offered to
sell on the autonomous market a sum of $500,000.00. As the representatives of
the appellant became interested in the offer, it was agreed with the offerors
that the said sum would be bought by the appellant for the sum of N15,000,000.00
(fifteen million naira). At the request of Alhaji Tijani, the appellant also
agreed that it would issue two cheques (bank drafts) for the sum of
N15,000,000.00 as follows:-
for the sum of N7.9 million Naira in favour of Nigeria
Universal Bank, and
the second cheque (bank draft) for the sum of N7.1
million naira in favour of the appellant.
It was a term
of the agreement that the two bank drafts would not be presented for payment
until the sum of $500,000.00 has been transferred and received into the foreign
account of the appellant bank.
Contrary to the
terms of the agreement, the draft for N7.1 million was presented for payment
before the $500,000.00 (Dollars) was paid into the foreign account of the
appellant. As this action was contrary to the agreement reached between the
appellant and Alhaji Ladan, the bank draft was not paid. It was returned and
marked â€œrepresentâ€. The other bank draft for N7.9 million was similarly
treated. Despite that treatment of the cheques, the sum of $500,000.00 (dollars)
that was promised by the offerrors namely, Alhaji Abubakar and Alhaji Ladan
remained unpaid into the account of the appellant. The bank draft for N7.1
million was however stopped by the appellant to prevent a fraud on itself.
the basis of the unpaid bank draft of N7.1 million commenced the action leading
to this appeal at the High Court of Lagos. At the conclusion of trial, the
respondent was awarded its claim for the sum of N7,100,000.00 being the value
of the bank draft issued by the appellant in favour of the respondent with
interest at the rate of 21% per annum from the 8th of February 1995 until the
date of the judgment, and thereafter at the rate of 10% per annum until the
judgment debt is fully paid.
Dissatisfied with the judgment of the
trial court, the appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal (Lagos Division). In
that court, the appellant was also unsuccessful and has therefore appealed to