With due respect to learned Senior Counsel to the appellant the proposition that the motive for doing an act does not necessarily determine the legality of the act is too well settled to require discussion. If there is a right to do an act, the fact that the motive for doing the act is bad will not affect its validity or legality. Similarly where there is no right, or the thing done is illegal, the purity of the motive or magnanimity of the act done will not alter the legal consequence. The motive of the party determining the contract is not one of the conditions stipulated for termination of the contract in “Exhibit N17”. See Mayor of Bradford v. Pickles (1895) A.C 587; Taiwo v. Kingsway Stores Ltd. (1950) 19 NLR.122.
– Karibe-Whyte, JSC. Chukwumah v. SPDC (1993)