The matter before Us today is whether:

Mr Odechi can be said to have entered into a contract to marry Ms Hajara and was in breach of same and whether there are consequences to such a breach and the error of the Courts below in this regard.

The facts of this case are very funny but a poignant and stark reminder of the society that We now live in. Summary of same is as follows:

Mr Odechi met Ms Hajara at a friend’s party about 9 years ago. About one month later He asked Her out. Ms Hajara made Mr Odechi know clearly from the start that She was not interested in just playing games but will only enter into the relationship if it is one that will be SERIOUS and lead to marriage. Mr Odechi agreed to this. Ms Hajara made His Lawyer prepare a contract to this end; Mr Odechi signed.

Ms Hajara, while holding on to the document for 9 years, did everything in the book to help Mr Odechi fulfill his dreams. She invested in His education to Master’s degree level and supported His business by donating half of Her salary every month, for more than a period of seven years, to prop it up until he broke even and became prosperous. She tendered the various bank statements to this end and for various other things and expenses that she incurred over the years. Mr Odechi is not proven to have spent any substantial amount on Hajara as She alleges that He was stingy and extremely thrifty.

Ms Hajara suddenly got involved in an auto-crash that left Her confined to a wheel chair for a period of four years now – and potentially for the rest of Her life. Mr Odechi is now married to Sisi-Oge; She was the best friend of Ms Hajara.

Lawyer to Mr Odechi argued that Mr Odechi was drunk at the time of signing the contract. He also argued that the contract is not enforceable as it is one that usually happens every now and then in the reality of Our society. He cited various cases in their favour.

Lawyer to Ms Hajara argued that it was indeed a breach of a contract – a promise to marry. They were quite confident of their case and tendered various documents and cited cases in their favour.

I shall now analyse the facts with the law.

Mr Udechi said He was intoxicated when He signed the contract to marry Ms Hajara but He failed to establish by evidence whether the intoxication was by way of love or alcohol. If it was by way of love then it is a non-issue, love is not a known defence in law; but if it was by way of alcohol then the effects of the alcohol ought to have worn out since the day after He signed such a contract. To further emasculate this head of argument, He admitted during cross-examination that they always celebrated their meeting and executed agreement annually when the going was still rosy. He ought to have seen it then and raised the necessary objections. He didn’t. The fact that an action is prevalent in the society does not make it legitimate or lawful. Whenever this court is invited to intervene in any matter, the consequences will be accordingly meted.

Among the ladies that We have nowadays, Ms Hajara has indeed shown herself to be one of the wisest – at least, legally. Hajara is indeed the dream of every good lawyer because she had almost all the expenses documented with dates and she also ensured Odechi signed a contract to marry Her. Looking at the recital to the Contract, I can see the name of Her Lawyer in this case as the Lawyer that prepared the contract for Her about 13 years ago. All these is quite a trove. Since everything to be earned from this Court, or any other Court whatsoever, is absolutely by evidence, Ms Hajara has made it abundantly easy for Her cause to be achieved. For the avoidance of stories that touch, she also kept a copy with Her Lawyer and yet another in the bank.

To further set the records straight, I shall digress a little. It is important to note that even in the event that Ms Hajara did not take the meticulous steps that She took to legally define their relationship, she can still prove that there was indeed a contract to marry her through oral evidence, that would however have made Her tasks more uphill as documentary evidence will almost always trump oral evidence. A promise to marry can therefore be proven by word of mouth and various conducts of the person who promised to marry such a person. In the absence of the actual document of contract therefore, receipts and bank statements can also do the tricks.

It is understandable to the ordinary man that marriage is a contract between two or more people but what is the place of persons who merely promise to marry each other? Can I be held liable for a promise? The laity would ask. The learned, this Honourable Court and the Law say: Yes! and Indeed!; a person can – by virtue of the doctrine of promissory estoppel. It stipulates that once a person takes actions that reasonably make others to change their positions and make sacrifices in response to a person’s actions then the person who benefited cannot turn round and state that He did not tell the victim to change their position or make such sacrifices. This is especially so in this case.

The panacea for this kind of scenario is not to promise directly or indirectly to marry anyone as a person can be held to be in breach of a promise to marry which is always a legitimate cause of action in the Courts that have jurisdiction to entertain same. And if anyone, indeed, wants to enter into a SERIOUS RELATIONSHIP, to make it easily provable in Court, get Him/Her to sign something. If He/She really loves You that much, He/She should be able to give You that insurance. The whole battle of troy was fought over the love of Helen. Do the suicides in Romeo and Juliet also ring a similar bell? Greater things have indeed been done in the name of love and signing a document should be the least anyone can do.

This matter was litigated in the two Courts below and the judgment in the Courts below were uniform in establishing that the acts of Mr Odechi was indeed unconscionable and deplorable.

Our Court will always honour the judgment of the Courts below and will only upturn their decision is they made serious mistakes. If the appeal is spurious, We will hold the Lawyer liable for that head.

This obviously is one of the situations where the Lawyer to Mr Odechi ought to have advised Him to settle the matter out of Court. He instead instigated Him to bring the case to Court with unfounded defence and even up to this Court.

I hereby hold that the facts and law as marshaled herein sustain the argument that Mr Odechi is in breach of the promise to marry to marry Ms Hajara and accordingly the necessary consequences shall follow:

I HEREBY ORDER THE LAWYER to Mr Odechi to personally pay the sum of N1,000,000.00 (One Million Naira) only to Mrs Hajara as punitive damages for baselessly making this case linger to this Court through his betrayal of His duty as a minister in this temple.

I RE-AFFIRM THE JUDGMENT OF THE COURTS BELOW, AND FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBT, I ORDER Mr Odechi to pay a sum of N3,000,000.00 (Three Million Naira) Only as damages for breaching the promise to marry Hajara.

I FURTHER RE-AFFIRM THE JUDGMENT OF THE COURTS BELOW BY ORDERING THAT Mr Odechi pay a refund to Hajara of a sum of N15,000,000.00 (Fifteen Million Naira) Only as specific damages for the amounts that She has successfully proven that She contributed to the success and financial prosperity of the life of Mr Odechi.

I HEREBY ORDER THAT, Mr Odechi pays an additional interest rate of 21% of the N15,000,000.00 (Fifteen Million Naira) Only at Compound interest,  to be calculated from the date on the Contract to the date of this judgment (which is a period of at least 13 years now).

I shall now rise.

©Eko Solicitors and Advocates

AUTHOR; JUSTICE OJIENOH