Ratio Decidendi



EMANUEL LADIPO ADEBIYI FRANCIS
V.
OSENI IBITOYE

(1936) JELR 63330 (DC)    
Divisional Court  ·  27 Jan 1936 ·  Nigeria

Ratio Decidendi

Editorial Summary
The plaintiff paid £26 to the defendant as part-payment for the land in dispute. He then proceeded to erect a building valued at £120. He brought this action claiming both the £26 and £120. The court held that the erection of the building was without the consent of the defendant and refused his claim for £120. The part-payment sum of £26 was, however, awarded to him.
Core Terms Beta
plaintiff
defendant
claim
suit
house
circumstances
cost of the building
defendant’s land
land
question
sale
amount
auctioneer
authority
branches of his claim
careful perusal of the evidence
case
completed sale
conclusion
consent judgment
date of the judgment
difficulty
ebute metta
experience
fact
graham paul
judgment
landowner
legal position
licence
macallum street
maxim quic quid plantator solo
nature of the claim
owner
part of the purchase price
part payments of the price of a real property
payments
personal property
plaintiff’s counsel
position
possession
property of the land
rate
receipts
respect
right title
statement of claim
trite law
valid completed sale
writ shows

GRAHAM PAUL, J.: The plaintiff in this suit claims £146 whereof £120 is the cost of the building erected by the plaintiff on the defendant’s land at 58, Macallum Street, Ebute Metta and £26 is the amount paid by the plaintiff to the defendant as part payment of the purchase price of the said land of which the defendant has now recovered possession from the plaintiff in suit 419/34 Oseni Ibitoye versus Francis.

In his statement of claim in this case the plaintiff alleges that the defendant agreed to sell, and did sell, the land in question to him but the nature of the claim in the writ shows that the plaintiff, is not really basing his claim on a completed sale. Both branches of his claim, the £120 and the £26, are quite in­consistent with the position that there had been a valid completed sale. Moreover I am satisfied that by the consent judgment in suit 419/34 the plaintiff would be definitely estopped from setting up the alleged sale.

The legal position is a perfectly simple one. The …

There's more. Sign in to continue reading.

judy.legal is the comprehensive database of case law and legislation from Ghana, Kenya and Nigeria. Gain seamless access to over 20,000 cases, recent judgments, statutes, and rules of court.

Get started   Login