Breach of Contract: Subscriber Drags RevolutionPlus to Court

RevolutionPlus Property Development Company Limited has been dragged before a Magistrate’s Court in Lagos State by a subscriber, Ebele Ikpeoyi, over alleged breach of contract and failure to deliver a property allegedly paid for between 2020 and 2022.

In the suit filed through her lawyer, Mr. Ugochukwu Eze, the aggrieved subscriber, who is a legal practitioner, stated that she subscribed to purchasing a plot of land located at Emirates Seaview Estate, Ibeju Lekki, Lagos State and upon full payment of the purchase price, was issued an allocation letter by the real estate company in March 2022. However, rather than execute the necessary documents for the transfer of interest in the property, RevolutionPlus sent her an email that stating that another property, located in a certain Highbury Estate and distinct from the land she had paid for, would be allocated to her.

The Claimant also alleged that despite repeated request (both directly and through lawyers) for the allocation of the land she paid for or a refund of the purchase price, together and other fees, she paid for the land, the Defendant refused to accede to her demand until she filed this suit in November 2022. She claimed that upon filing the suit, the real state company sent her a post-dated cheque which was rejected twice by her bank with an instruction that she returns same to the issuer. She added that due to of the Defendant’s default, she incurred huge costs in securing another property around the area where she initially purchased a land from the Defendant. She, therefore, wants the court to award damages against the real estate company for breach of contract.

At the resumed hearing of the matter on Monday, August 7, 2023, the Defendant, through its counsel, Samson Adelowo, informed the court that it has an application seeking to have the court strike out the suit or refer the parties to arbitration. He argued that the parties agreed to resolve any dispute between them by arbitration, as such, the court has no jurisdiction to entertain the suit. But the Claimant’s counsel argued that his client never signed the agreement containing the arbitration clause and that assuming parties ever had such an agreement, the debt sought to be recovered by the Claimant is not disputed, rather, it has been admitted by the Defendant. Thus, there is no dispute for the court to refer to arbitration. Citing some authorities, the Claimant’s counsel stated that the Court has no power to refer the parties to arbitration given the circumstance of the case.

However, in a sharp turn of events, the Magistrate stated that he will not be able to determine the Defendant’s application as he may be leaving the service in no time and may not be able to write a ruling on the application. He added that it will be better for the application to be argued before the Magistrate who will take over the case file. While urging parties to take steps to settle the dispute, the court adjourned the matter to October 4, 2023 for hearing of pending applications.