Court orders firm to refund N2m over failed dredging contract

A Lagos High Court, Alausa, Ikeja has ordered a local firm – OPR Equipment and its CEO, Mr. Tairu Oladimeji to refund N2million to Dr. Prince Alum Nduka, who is trading under the name (Anfani Estate).

The court sat on appeal to a decision of a magistrate court, which Nduka appealed.

The appellant claimed N4 million for a failed contract of dredging/sand-filling of plots of land at Lakowe.

The appellant had engaged the respondents to sandfill about 30 plots of land purchased by the appellant at Gbetu village at Lakowe for which the respondent issued a quotation setting out some terms and cost of the contract.

The duration of the sand filling by the respondents was put at four months from the day of payment and a total contract sum of N12,500 was agreed as the contract sum with the sum of N4 million payable as advance payment.

The appellant said he paid the sum of N4 million to the respondents on April 10, 2021, and the respondent cleared the entire land but did not sand fill the plots of land.

But the respondents in their defence, argued that six out of the 30 plots of land were sand-filled before a heavy downpour of rain flooded and washed away the sand filling.

The respondents, therefore, declared the defence of force majeure (an act of God) and refused to give a refund of the N4 million to the appellant.

The respondents rather asked for an upward review of the contract price for the execution of the contract.

When the matter came up on December 9, 2022, in a claim marked SCC/IKJ/210/2022 at a Magistrate Court in Lagos, the trial Magistrate, Mrs. O.I. Raji dismissed the case for lack of evidence.

The Magistrate held that the claimant failed to establish the claims before the court.

She also stated that the claimant did not furnish cogent evidence to substantiate his claim.

Dissatisfied, the claimant appealed against the judgment before the high court.

Justice A.M. Ipaye in her judgment held that the lower court failed to fully evaluate the totality of evidence placed before it, especially on facts admitted by the respondents on the sum paid to him by the claimant.

The judge also held that the lower court did not avert her mind to the Quantum Meruit claim as it related to the claims of the claimant and therefore, set aside the judgment of the lower court.