PRINCIPLE STATEMENT

Failure of a plaintiff to file a defence to a counter-claim may not be disastrous if they succeed in their claim, as success may render the counter-claim useless depending on its nature; however, where the plaintiff fails in their claim and filed no defence to the counter-claim, the defendant's counter-claim remains uncontroverted.

RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)

Per Ogundare, J.S.C., quoting Akpata, J.S.C. in Ogbonna v. Attorney-General Imo State, in Dabup v. Kolo (1993) NLC-621989(SC) at pp. 33; Paras C--D.
"failure of a plaintiff to file a defence to a counter-claim may not be disastrous if he succeeds in his claim, His success may render useless the counter-claim depending on the nature of the counter-claim. However where he fails in his claim, as in this case, and had filed no defence to the counter-claim, the defendant's claim in his counter-claim remains uncontroverted."
View Judgment

EXPLANATION / SCOPE

A plaintiff’s failure to defend against a counter-claim has different consequences depending on the outcome of their main claim. If the plaintiff succeeds, the counter-claim may become moot—for example, if the counter-claim seeks relief inconsistent with the plaintiff’s successful claim. However, if the plaintiff’s claim fails and no defence to the counter-claim was filed, the counter-claim stands uncontroverted. Without a defence, the counter-claim’s allegations are deemed admitted, and the defendant may obtain judgment on the counter-claim. This reflects the general principle that failure to plead is deemed admission. The practical lesson: plaintiffs must defend counter-claims even if confident in their main claims, as failure of the main claim leaves counter-claims unopposed.

CASES APPLYING THIS PRINCIPLE