WEST AFRICAN CHEMICAL COMPANY LTD
V.
CAROLINE POULTRY FARM (NIGERIA) LTD

(1999) JELR 45346 (CA)    

Court of Appeal  ·  CA/E/30/89 ·  8 Dec 1999 ·  Nigeria
 · 
Other Citations
W.A.C.C. Ltd. v. Caroline Poultry Farm Ltd. (2000) 2 NWLR (Pt.644), pg. 197 WEST AFRICAN CHEMICAL COMPANY LIMITED v. CAROLINE POULTRY FARM (NIG.) LIMITED
CORAM
JAMES OGENYI OGEBE Justice of The Court of Appeal of Nigeria IGNATIUS CHUKWUDI PATS-ACHOLONU Justice of The Court of Appeal of Nigeria ABOYI JOHN IKONGBEH Justice of The Court of Appeal of Nigeria
Core Terms Beta
respondent
evidence
special damages
case
trial judge
large numbers
learned trial judge
poultry farm
doctrine of res ipsa loquitur
learned counsel
port harcourt
issues
brief of argument
following cases
general damages
trial court
veterinary doctor
vom veterinary research institute
2nd september
brother ogebe
civil cases
common sense
conclusion of the case
credible evidence
dr. iyo
evidence of pw2
evidence of the defendants
evidence p.w.1
exhibit j.
exhibit k.
favour of the respondent
greatest respect
high court
ipsa loquitur
leading judgment
pats-acholonu
post-mortem report
proof of its claim
proper care
res ipsa loquitur
respondent special damages
result of the disinfectant
said farm
second issue
services of the appellant
spraying of his poultry farm
statement of claim
statement of claim of the respondent
ulterior motive

OGEBE, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment): The Respondent sued the appellant before the High Court, Port Harcourt claiming N300,000.00 special and general damages for negligence. Pleadings were exchanged and amended here and there. The respondent owned a poultry farm which developed a bad odour. It employed the services of the appellant to remove the odour.

On the 2nd of September, 1980 the appellant carried out these services by disinfecting the farm. In the statement of claim it was alleged that on the 5th of September, the respondent observed that birds in the farm were dying in large numbers. It made contact with the appellant which did nothing. Several letters were exchanged between the parties and eventually the respondent sued for negligence.

The respondent called three witnesses in proof of its claim. It was not disputed by both sides that there was an agreement between them for the appellant to control the bad odour in the poultry farm. The respondent gave evidence thr…

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