LEGAL PRINCIPLE: CIVIL PROCEDURE – Pleadings – Joinder of Issue – Whether Parties Joined Issue on Dishonour of Cheques
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
The above reproduced paragraphs of the parties' pleadings eloquently attest to the fact that the parties substantially joined issues on the vexed question of the dishonour and subsequent loss of the aforesaid cheques in their pleadings. Thus it is undoubted that the parties fully reacted on the dishonouring and loss of the controversial cheques lodged by the respondent in his account. What is however more interesting is that the learned trial Judge made a finding in relation to the status of these cheques in terms of the parties' pleadings and evidence led at the trial... One is obviously in no doubt that both parties as well as the trial court fully addressed the issue of the 'dishonour and subsequent loss of the five cheques' respectively in the parties' pleadings and in the judgment of the trial court. Okezie, JCA was therefore in grave error to have reached the decision, inter alia, to set aside the judgment of the trial Judge on the premises that the appellant at the trial court failed to establish in it pleadings and by evidence that the five cheques paid in by the respondent were in fact dishonoured.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Achike, JSC, in Bank of the North Ltd. v. Alhaji Bala Yau (2001) NLC-2501993(SC) at pp. 7–8; Paras A–C.
"The above reproduced paragraphs of the parties' pleadings eloquently attest to the fact that the parties substantially joined issues on the vexed question of the dishonour and subsequent loss of the aforesaid cheques in their pleadings. Thus it is undoubted that the parties fully reacted on the dishonouring and loss of the controversial cheques lodged by the respondent in his account. What is however more interesting is that the learned trial Judge made a finding in relation to the status of these cheques in terms of the parties' pleadings and evidence led at the trial... One is obviously in no doubt that both parties as well as the trial court fully addressed the issue of the 'dishonour and subsequent loss of the five cheques' respectively in the parties' pleadings and in the judgment of the trial court. Okezie, JCA was therefore in grave error to have reached the decision, inter alia, to set aside the judgment of the trial Judge on the premises that the appellant at the trial court failed to establish in it pleadings and by evidence that the five cheques paid in by the respondent were in fact dishonoured."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Parties join issue when their pleadings directly address the same factual or legal question. Here, the parties substantially joined issue on dishonour and loss of cheques—the statement of claim averred non-payment; the defence denied and demanded proof. The trial court properly made findings based on pleadings and evidence. An appellate court errs by holding that an issue was not pleaded when the record clearly shows it was. The appellate court must examine the entire record before concluding that an issue was not joined. A finding that an issue was not pleaded when it was is a grave error. The appellate court cannot set aside a judgment on a mistaken premise about the pleadings. The error goes to the root of the appellate decision.