IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY HOLDEN AT JABI - ABUJA THIS TUESDAY, THE 4 TH DAY OF JUNE, 2013
|
|
- Irma Murphy
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY HOLDEN AT JABI - ABUJA THIS TUESDAY, THE 4 TH DAY OF JUNE, 2013 BEFORE: HON. JUSTICE UGOCHUKWU A. OGAKWU - JUDGE MOTION NO. FCT/HC/M/1882/2012 BETWEEN: WHOT RIEM CREDIT AND THRIFT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY... PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT 1 AND MR. MENE OLAMIRE... DEFENDANT/APPLICANT RULING The Plaintiff instituted the substantive action against the Defendant claiming for the outstanding amount on the loan which it granted the Defendant. The court processes were duly served on the Defendant. The Defendant had issues with the competence of the action. He consequently entered a conditional appearance and further filed a motion on notice in which he urged the court to strike out the suit for want of jurisdiction. This Ruling is in respect of the said motion on notice. The motion on notice which was filed on 19 th November 2012 is predicated on the following grounds: 1. That the Plaintiff lacks the locus to institute the action. 2. That the High Court is not the proper forum to hear the case pursuant to Section 44 of the Cooperative Societies Act Cap 488 Laws of the FCT 2007 and the Regulation made thereunder. The motion on notice is supported by an affidavit of eight paragraphs with one exhibit attached thereto. Pursuant to the provisions of Order 7 Rule 23 of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2004 (HCR), a written address was filed in support of the motion. On 11 th February 2013, the Plaintiff filed a fifteen paragraph counter affidavit as well as a written address in opposition to the motion on notice. Subsequently on 15 th February 2013, the Plaintiff filed and attached a list of the documents referred to in the said counter affidavit. In his written address, the Defendant distilled two issues as arising for determination as follows: 1. Whether or not the Plaintiff has the locus standi to institute this suit. 2. If issue one is resolved in the Plaintiff s favour, then whether or not the High Court of the FCT has the requisite jurisdiction to entertain this suit. The Plaintiff equally formulated two issues for determination in its written address, namely: 1. Whether this court has jurisdiction to entertain this suit in spite of Section 44 of the Cooperative Societies Act Whether the Plaintiff possess(es) the requisite locus standi to institute this action. At the hearing of the motion on 30 th April 2013, Alozie Nmerengwa, Esq., learned counsel for the Defendant referred to the grounds of the motion and relied on the paragraphs of the supporting affidavit. He adopted the submissions in the written address filed in support of the motion on notice and he urged the Court to grant the motion. Equally, Rotimi Ojo, Esq., of counsel for the Plaintiff relied on the paragraphs of the counter affidavit. He adopted the submissions in the Plaintiff s written address and further submitted that the word may used in Section 44 of the Cooperative Societies Act was permissive and not mandatory. He urged the court to dismiss the motion.
2 Replicando, Alozie Nmerengwa, Esq., learned counsel for the Defendant referred to Section 2 of the Co-operative Societies Act on the meaning of a member, positing that a combined reading of Sections 2 and 44 (1) of the Cooperative Societies Act shows that a legal action in court is not contemplated by the Act. He further contended that the exhibits referred to in the counter affidavit were not filed with the counter affidavit and he therefore urged the court to discountenance the list of documents that was later filed to attach the said exhibits. I have incisively considered the processes in respect of this motion and the submissions of learned counsel. The motion is hinged on the two broad grounds of law of locus standi and the proper forum or venue for ventilating the Plaintiff s cause of action. The issues for determination formulated by the parties though differently worded are in actual sense of the same purport and effect. The issue of locus standi, which is issue number one formulated by the Defendant and issue number two formulated by the Plaintiff, is a challenge on the court s jurisdiction because if the court holds that the Plaintiff has no locus standi, the court s jurisdiction will be ousted. See EMEZI vs. OSUAGWU (2005) 2 NWLR (PT 939) 340 at 359 and OGBUEHI vs. GOV. IMO STATE (1995) 9 NWLR (PT 417) 53. Furthermore, where the court holds that the Plaintiff has no locus standi, then it will unnecessary to go into the issue raised with regard to the proper forum or venue for ventilation of the Plaintiff s cause of action. Accordingly, in resolving this motion I will follow the order in which the issues for determination were distilled and presented by the Defendant. ISSUE NUMBER ONE WHETHER THE PLAINTIFF HAS THE LOCUS STANDI TO INSTITUTE THIS ACTION The contention of the Defendant is that he had no dealings with the Plaintiff and he relies on Exhibit A of the supporting affidavit as showing that the loan agreement is between him and Whot Riem Strategies Limited and not with the Plaintiff on record. It was therefore posited that there is no privity of contract between him and the Plaintiff, and therefore the Plaintiff was not in any way aggrieved in order to be invested with the locus to institute the action. On its part, the Plaintiff maintains that the averments in the Statement of Claim and the documents pleaded show the contractual relationship between the Plaintiff and the Defendant regarding the loan facility and that to the knowledge of the Defendant, Whot Riem Strategies Limited was a consultant to the Plaintiff; and that the Defendant had dealt with the Plaintiff with such understanding, writing series of applications for rollover of the facility and proposal for payment of the facility to the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff insists that the averment in the Statement of Claim discloses sufficient interest in the subject matter of the claim, thus giving it the standing to sue. Now, the term locus standi denotes the legal capacity to institute proceedings in a court of law for redress or assertion of a right enforceable at law. See A-G KADUNA STATE vs. HASSAN (1985) 2 NWLR (PT 18) 453 at 496. The term is often used interchangeably with the terms title and standing to sue. The fundamental aspect of locus standi is that it focuses on the party before the court and not on the issues he presents to the court for adjudication. See ADESANYA vs. PRESIDENT OF NIGERIA (1981) 1 All NLR 1. Locus standi can be a matter of law only or a question of fact only. It is a matter of law only when a statute specifically provides for the category of persons who can commence a particular action. It is a question of fact only when the law does not specifically provide for the category of persons who can sue. In this latter situation, the plaintiff in his processes avers to facts which show that he has the standing to sue. See ALBIN CONSTRUCTION vs. RAO INVESTMENTS AND PROPERTIES LTD (1992) 1 NWLR (PT 219) 583 at 594. The plaintiff need not plead in the statement of claim that he has locus standi, all he needs to plead are facts establishing his rights and obligations in respect of the subject matter of the suit. See OROGAN vs. SOREMEKUN (1986) 2 NSCC 1231 at In determining whether a plaintiff has locus standi, it is the cause of action that has to be examined. See OLORIODE vs. OYEBI (1984) 5 SC 1 at 28. A cause of action being the entire set of circumstances giving rise to an enforceable claim. It is in effect the fact or combination of facts giving rise to the right to sue and it consists of two elements viz: (i) the wrongful act of the defendant which gives the plaintiff his cause of complaint and (ii) the consequent damage. See IBRAHIM vs. OSIM (1988) 3 NWLR (PT 82) 257 and THOMAS vs. OLUFOSOYE (1986) 1 NWLR (PT 18) 669. The only material a court considers in determining whether a plaintiff has locus standi is the originating process filed by the plaintiff, usually, the writ of summons and statement of claim: see A-G FED. vs. A-G ABIA STATE (2001) 40 WRN 1 at 63. 2
3 Locus standi in a suit is determinable, only from the totality of the averments in the statement of claim, which must be carefully scrutinised with a view to ascertaining whether sufficient interest giving the standing to sue has been disclosed. See BUSARI vs. OSENI (1992) 4 NWLR (PT 235) 557 at 558 and OWODUNNI vs. REGISTERED TRUSTEES OF CELESTIAL CHURCH OF CHRIST (2000) 6 SC (PT III) 60 at 97, It is for this reason that the contention of the Defendant s counsel on the documents referred to in the counter affidavit having been filed separately is of no moment since in determining the question of locus standi, the court only considers the averments in the statement of claim. Where the facts presented disclose the right or interest of the plaintiff which have been or are in danger of being violated, invaded or adversely affected by the act(s) of the defendant, the complaint of such a plaintiff would be deemed to have shown sufficient interest to give him the locus standi to litigate over the subject matter in issue. In Public Law, the determinant of the locus standi of a plaintiff is whether his interest or injury in the action exceeds that of the general public. In Private Law, the determinant is whether the reliefs claimed would confer some benefit on him. See OWODUNNI vs. REGISTERED TRUSTEES OF CELESTIAL CHURCH OF CHRIST (supra) at The test of sufficient interest is whether the person seeking a redress or remedy will suffer from injury or hardship arising from the litigation. If the court is satisfied that he would so suffer, then he must be heard, as he is entitled to be heard. See A-G LAGOS vs. EKO HOTELS LTD (2006) 18 NWLR (PT 1011) 378 at 450, OJUKWU vs. GOV. OF LAGOS STATE (1985) 2 NWLR (PT 10) 806 and ODELEYE vs. ADEPEGBA (2001) 5 NWLR (PT 706) 330. The fact that a person may not succeed in an action does not have anything to do with whether or not they have the standing to sue. See LAWAL vs. SALAMI (2002) 2 NWLR (PT 752) 687 and DANIYAN vs. IYAGIN (2002) 7 NWLR (PT 766) 346. When a court is considering an objection to the locus standi of a plaintiff to maintain an action, the following have been distilled from a long line of cases as guiding principles: (a) the plaintiff must show that his civil rights and obligations have been or are in danger of being infringed; (b) the fact that a person may not succeed in an action does not have anything to do with whether or not a person has the standing to sue; (c) whether a person s civil rights and obligations have been affected depends on the peculiar facts of the case; and (d) the courts should not give an unduly restrictive interpretation to the expression locus standi. See FAWEHINMI vs. AKILU (1987) 4 NWLR (PT 69) 797, NNADI vs. OKORO (1998) 1 NWLR (PT 535) 573 at 600 and A-G KADUNA vs. HASSAN (supra). As already noted, locus standi could be a matter of law only or a question of fact only. I know of no statute which prescribes the category of persons who can commence the kind of action instituted by the Plaintiff and none has been brought to the attention of the court. The issue of the Plaintiff s locus standi is therefore a question of fact which can be ascertained from the Statement of Claim. In order to show sufficient interest in the Plaintiff therefore, the statement of claim must set out: (i) the legal right of the Plaintiff; (ii) the obligation of the Defendant; (iii) the facts constituting the infraction of the Plaintiff s legal right, and/or (iv) the failure of the Defendant to fulfil his obligation in such a way that if there is no proper defence the Plaintiff will succeed in the reliefs it seeks. See ETALUKU vs. NBC PLC (2004) 15 NWLR (PT 896) 370 at 399. I have carefully scrutinized the totality of the averments in the Statement of Claim (see particularly paragraphs 3 12) and I am satisfied that the averments therein show the legal rights of the Plaintiff, the obligation of the Defendant, the failure by the Defendant to fulfil his obligation by repaying the loan which failure constitutes the infraction of the Plaintiff s legal right to have the loan repaid. Accordingly, I am satisfied that the Plaintiff has disclosed sufficient interest giving it the locus standi, standing or title to sue: OWODUNNI vs. CELESTIAL CHURCH OF CHRIST (supra). Consequently, I am unable to agree with the Defendant, who extracted one of the documents relied upon by the Plaintiff and on the basis of which he premised his contention that the Plaintiff does not have locus standi. An integral consideration of the totality of the averments and documents relied upon by the Plaintiff bears out the fact that the Plaintiff has sufficient interest in the matter and since the same affects its civil rights and obligations, it is entitled to be heard: A-G LAGOS vs. EKO HOTELS LTD (supra). Having found that the Plaintiff has the requisite locus standi and concomitantly the court has jurisdiction, I will now proceed to the second issue for determination in this motion which is on the proper forum or venue for the ventilation of the Plaintiff s cause of action. ISSUE NUMBER TWO WHETHER THE HIGH COURT OF THE FCT HAS THE REQUISITE JURISDICTION TO ENTERTAIN THE SUIT The contention of the Defendant is that the court does not have the competence to entertain the action on the basis of Section 44 of the Co-operative Societies Act which stipulates that any dispute touching the business of a 3
4 registered society, which includes a claim for a debt, is to be sent to the Registrar of Co-operative Societies and such a dispute by Order 21 of the Cooperative Societies Regulations is to be decided by arbitration. Relying on the decision in MADUKOLU vs. NKEMDILIM (1962) 2 SCNLR 341 or (1962) 2 NSCC 374 or (2001) 46 WRN 1, the Defendant maintained that the court was not competent to entertain the action. The Plaintiff in its reply submits that parties are bound by their agreement and that the court cannot make a contract or re-write the contract made by the parties. The Plaintiff maintained that the contract entered into by the parties did not envisage the referral of any dispute arising therefrom to arbitration; that the parties do not have any agreement to arbitrate and therefore Section 44 of the Co-operative Societies Act was not binding particularly when it was not made part of the contract by the parties. It is the further submission of the Plaintiff that Section 44 of the Co-operative Societies Act uses the word may as opposed to shall. Therefore the reference of any the dispute to the Registrar of Co-operative Societies was at the discretion of the parties. Now, Section 44 of the Co-operative Societies Act clearly stipulates that a dispute touching the business of a registered society, which includes a claim by a registered society for a debt or demand due to it, MAY be referred to the Registrar of Co-operative Societies for decision. It is upon such a reference being made that Order 21 of the Co-operative Societies Regulations then stipulates that the Registrar may either decide the dispute himself or refer it to arbitration. The paramount question for consideration is whether the stipulation of Section 44 of the Cooperative Societies Act is a mandatory provision, such that any dispute has to be referred to the Registrar for decision as contended by the Defendant. This is an inevitable question in view of the fact that the word used in Section 44 is MAY. The word may is an auxiliary verb which qualifies ability, competence, probability or contingency. Regardless of the instrument in which it appears whether Constitution, statute, deed or contract, the courts sometimes construe may as shall or must so that justice may not be a slave to grammar. However, as a general rule, the word may will not be treated as a word of command unless there is something in the context or subject matter of the Act to indicate that it was used in such sense. In the construction of statutes and rules the word may as opposed to shall is indicative of discretion or choice between two or more alternatives, but the context in which the word appears must be the controlling factor. Put differently, in interpreting the word may the context in which the word appears is the controlling factor whether it has a mandatory or directory effect. See BLACK S LAW DICTIONARY, ATAYI FARMS LTD vs. NACB LTD (2003) 4 NWLR (PT 810) 427 at 447G 448D, I.C.A.N vs. A-G FEDERATION (2004) 3 NWLR (PT 859) 186 at 207E 209D and ORAKUL RESOURCES LTD vs. NCC (2007) 16 NWLR (PT 1060) 270 at 303G 304B. Although the etymological meaning of may is permissive and facultative, and seldom can mean must and imperative, it assumes this last mentioned character when there is anything in the provision that makes it the duty on the person on whom the power is conferred to exercise that power. When the exercise of the power is coupled with a duty on the person to whom it is given to exercise it, then it is imperative. See ADESOLA vs. ABIDOYE (1999) 14 NWLR (PT 637) 28 at 56. I therefore pause and ask, whether the context in which the word may appears in Section 44 of the Co-operative Societies Act is the controlling factor? Or in other words, whether there is a duty on the person on whom the power is conferred to exercise that power. A close look at Section 44 of the Co-operative Societies Act appears to indicate that the word may therein employed is not the controlling factor. The duty therein conferred is on a person to refer a dispute to the Registrar. The person so aggrieved may choose not to enforce his right in which case he does not have to refer any dispute to the Registrar. Equally, he may choose in pursuit of his civil rights and obligations to have such a dispute determined by any of the courts in which judicial powers have been invested by Section 6 of the Constitution. It therefore seems that it is for the person aggrieved to use his faculty to decide whether to refer the dispute to the Registrar for decision or not. This in my opinion clearly shows that the word may used in Section 44 of the Cooperative Societies Act is merely directory or permissive. It is neither mandatory nor imperative such that the Plaintiff can be said to have chosen the wrong venue or forum for the ventilation of its cause of action. In OBIOHA vs. DAFE (1994) 2 NWLR (PT 325) 157 at it was held that the cardinal principle in interpretation of a statute is to discover the intention of the lawmaker and that where the matter calls for the interpretation of a word like may the whole section is to be read together in order to discover the intention of the lawmaker. The principle is that whenever a statute creates a duty, the primary question will be what is the sanction that has been provided for its breach? Since no statute creates an obligation without anticipating a breach. If there is a sanction then the provision is mandatory. It is absolute. Where a court cannot interfere to compel performance or indeed punish the breach of duty, the act is directory. Bringing this principle closer home, relative to the facts of this matter, can the court punish an aggrieved party who decides not to refer a dispute to the Registrar of Co-operative Societies? I think not. This is particularly so because 4
5 the Co-operative Societies Act has not provided for any sanction where a dispute has not been so referred. It is thus clear that the word may employed in Section 44 of the Co-operative Societies Act is merely directory and not compulsory. It confers a discretionary power. See EMOKPAE vs. UNIBEN (2002) 17 NWLR (PT 795) 137 and AMAEFULE vs. THE STATE (1988) 2 NWLR (PT 75) 156. In BAKARE vs. A-G FEDERATION (1990) 5 NWLR (PT 152) 516, the Supreme Court interpreted the word may to be directory and not mandatory. See also WILSON vs. OKEKE (2011) 3 NWLR (PT 1235) 456 at 473. Accordingly, the Defendant s challenge to the competence of the court to entertain the Plaintiff s action on the ground that this High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja is not the proper forum or venue for ventilating the Plaintiff s cause of action cannot be correct. In a summation, having duly considered the two broad grounds of law on which this motion has been anchored and having resolved both of them against the Defendant, the motion is totally devoid of merit. The same fails and it is hereby dismissed. Appearances: Rotimi Ojo, Esq. (with Jacob Usang, Esq. and Mrs. Joy Umoren) for the Plaintiff. Alozie Nmerengwa, Esq. for the Defendant. UGOCHUKWU ANTHONY OGAKWU PRESIDING JUDGE 5
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY HOLDEN AT ABUJA THIS THURSDAY, THE 25 TH DAY OF APRIL, 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY HOLDEN AT ABUJA THIS THURSDAY, THE 25 TH DAY OF APRIL, 2013 BEFORE: HON. JUSTICE UGOCHUKWU A. OGAKWU - JUDGE MOTION NO. M/4719/2013 BETWEEN: 1. COSMOS
More information(2018) LPELR-45834(CA)
BRAINS & ANOR v. NWAFOR CITATION: In the Court of Appeal In the Abuja Judicial Division Holden at Abuja ABUBAKAR DATTI YAHAYA ON THURSDAY, 12TH JULY, 2018 Suit No: CA/A/102/2009 TINUADE AKOMOLAFE-WILSON
More informationRULING ON NOTICE OF PRELIMINARY OBJECTION. The applicant by a preliminary objection dated 5/4/13 moved the court to:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF NIGERIA IN THE ABUJA JUDICIAL DIVISION HOLDEN AT LUGBE ABUJA ON, 17 TH OCTOBER, 2013. BEFORE HIS LORDSHIP:- HON. JUSTICE A. O. OTALUKA. SUIT NO.:-
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF THE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY HOLDEN AT ABUJA BEFORE HON. JUSTICE SYLVANUS C. ORIJI RULING
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY, ABUJA HOLDEN AT ABUJA ON TUESDAY, 21 ST DAY OF MAY, 2013 BEFORE HON. JUSTICE SYLVANUS C. ORIJI SUIT NO. FCT/HC/CV/866/2012 BETWEEN LIVING EYES INTERNATIONAL
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF THE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY HOLDEN AT HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE WUSE ABUJA BEFORE HIS LORDSHIP: HON. JUSTICE M.M.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY BETWEEN:- HOLDEN AT HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE WUSE ABUJA ON THE 18 TH DAY OF JULY, 2013 BEFORE HIS LORDSHIP: HON. JUSTICE M.M. KOLO COURT NO. HIGH COURT THIRTY
More informationBEFORE HIS LORDSHIP: HONOURABLE JUSTICE FOLASADE OJO JUDGE: BETWEEN:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY IN THE ABUJA JUDICIAL DIVISION HOLDEN AT ABUJA ON THE 3RD DAY OF OCTOBER 2013 SUIT NO. FCT/HC/CV/2563/12 BEFORE HIS LORDSHIP: HONOURABLE JUSTICE FOLASADE
More informationBETWEEN: AND AND RULING
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY IN THE ABUJA JUDICIAL DIVISION HOLDEN AT ABUJA ON THE 28 TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2013 SUIT NO. FCT/HC/M/8529/13 BEFORE HIS LORDSHIP: HONOURABLE JUSTICE FOLASADE
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY ABUJA. OJI PRESIDING JUDGE SUIT NO: FCT\HC\CV\6015\11 BETWEEN:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY ABUJA. IN THE ABUJA JUDICIAL DIVISION HOLDEN AT WUSE ABUJA ON THE 13 TH DAY OF MAY, 2013 BEFORE HIS LORDSHIP HON JUSTICE CHIZOBA N. OJI PRESIDING
More informationTHE EFFECT OF THE ABOLITION OF DEMURRER PROCEEDINGS IN NIGERIAN COURTS CLARIFYING THE MISAPPLICATION
THE EFFECT OF THE ABOLITION OF DEMURRER PROCEEDINGS IN NIGERIAN COURTS CLARIFYING THE MISAPPLICATION The operation of demurrer 1 proceedings, before it was abolished in England was the necessity to allow
More informationSUIT NO. FCT/HC/CV/1599/10 MOTION NO: FCT/HC/M/3716/10 FCT/H/G/15/M/75/10 BETWEEN:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY IN THE ABUJA JUDICIAL DIVISION HOLDEN AT ABUJA BEFORE HIS LORDSHIP, HON. JUSTICE A.A.I. BANJOKO JUDGE SUIT NO. FCT/HC/CV/1599/10 MOTION NO: FCT/HC/M/3716/10
More informationBETWEEN: 1. CHIEF EBENEZER OGBONNA 2 ELDER EPELLE AGIRIGA === 1 ST SET OF 3. CHIEF JOSAIAH NWOGU PLAINTIFFS 4. ELDER NWOBILOR NWELE
IN THE FEDERAL HIGH COURT OF NIGERIA IN THE UMUAHIA JUDICIAL DIVISION HOLDEN AT UMUAHIA ON WEDNESDAY THE 29 TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2014 BEFORE THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE F. A. OLUBANJO JUDGE SUIT NO: FHC/UM/CS/64/2005
More informationIN THE NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL COURT OF NIGERIA
IN THE NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL COURT OF NIGERIA ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
More information(2018) LPELR-44008(CA)
BLUEBAY GLOBAL CONCEPTS LTD & ANOR v. CITY VIEW ESTATES LTD CITATION: In the Court of Appeal In the Abuja Judicial Division Holden at Abuja ON TUESDAY, 6TH FEBRUARY, 2018 Suit No: CA/A/301/2016 EMMANUEL
More informationThe Undefended List Provisions in the Uniform High Court Civil Procedure Rules. Yusuf O. Ali
The Undefended List Provisions in the Uniform High Court Civil Procedure Rules By Yusuf O. Ali INTRODUCTION: Prior to 1987, the various states of Nigeria had their own High Court Civil Procedure Rules
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF THE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY IN THE ABUJA JUDICIAL DIVISION HOLDEN AT APO
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY IN THE ABUJA JUDICIAL DIVISION HOLDEN AT APO BEFORE HIS LORDSHIP, HON. JUSTICE U.P KEKEMEKE MOTION NO. FCT/HC/M/389/11 DATE: 23/10/13 BETWEEN: MRS. OLGA
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF THE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY HOLDEN AT HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE WUSE ABUJA ON THE 20TH DAY OF MAY, 2013 BEFORE HIS LORDSHIP: - HON
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY HOLDEN AT HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE WUSE ABUJA ON THE 20 TH DAY OF MAY, 2013 BEFORE HIS LORDSHIP: - HON. JUSTICE M.A NASIR COURT NO.:- HIGH COURT TWENTY TWO
More informationAND 1. NATIONAL AGENCY FOR FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION AND CONTROL (NAFDAC) 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL NAFDAC RULING A.
FEDERAL HIGH COURT OF NIGERIA IN THE ABUJA JUDICIAL DIVISION HOLDEN AT ABUJA ON MONDAY THE 15 TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2014 BEFORE HIS LORDSHIP, HON. JUSTICE A. F. A. ADEMOLA JUDGE SUIT NO: FHC/ABJ/CS/760/13
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY IN THE ABUJA JUDICIAL DIVISION HOLDEN AT WUSE ZONE 2 ABUJA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY IN THE ABUJA JUDICIAL DIVISION HOLDEN AT WUSE ZONE 2 ABUJA BEFORE HIS LORDSHIP: HON.JUSTICE D.Z. SENCHI COURT CLERKS: T. P. SALLAH & ORS. COURT NUMBER:
More informationI.S. G. VEMBEH for the Plaintiff Plaintiff is in Court. Defendant in Court. JUDGEMENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY ABUJA IN THE ABUJA JUDICIAL DIVISION HOLDEN AT COURT NO.36 ABUJA BEFORE HIS LORDSHIP: HON JUSTICE A.S ADEPOJU ON THE 13 TH DAY OF JUNE, 2013 SUIT NO:
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY IN THE ABUJA JUDICIAL DIVISION HOLDEN AT MAITAMA ABUJA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY IN THE ABUJA JUDICIAL DIVISION HOLDEN AT MAITAMA ABUJA BEFORE HIS LORDSHIP: HON. JUSTICE SALISU GARBA COURT CLERKS: BWALA NATHAN & OTHERS COURT NUMBER:
More information(2018) LPELR-44208(CA)
OKAFOR & ORS v. EZEATU CITATION: HUSSEIN MUKHTAR In the Court of Appeal In the Enugu Judicial Division Holden at Enugu ON TUESDAY, 13TH FEBRUARY, 2018 Suit No: CA/E/165/2015 MUHAMMED LAWAL SHUAIBU FREDERICK
More informationMISS OLUCHI ANYANWOKO V. CHIEF MRS CHRISTY OKOYE
MISS OLUCHI ANYANWOKO V. CHIEF MRS CHRISTY OKOYE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NIGERIA HOLDEN AT ABUJA ON FRIDAY THE 22TH DAYOF JANUARY, 2010 CORAM GEORGE ADESOLA OGUNTADE FRANCIS FEDODE TABAI JAMES OGENYI OGEBE
More informationThe defendant did not defend this suit. She neither entered appearance nor file any pleadings.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY ABUJA IN THE ABUJA JUDICIAL DIVISION HOLDEN AT COURT NO.36 ABUJA BEFORE HIS LORDSHIP: HON JUSTICE A.S ADEPOJU ON THE 19 TH DAY OF JULY, 2013 SUIT NO:
More information(2018) LPELR-46032(CA)
BUBA v. ISA CITATION: In the Court of Appeal In the Yola Judicial Division Holden at Yola ON WEDNESDAY, 28TH NOVEMBER, 2018 Suit No: CA/YL/08/2018 OYEBISI FOLAYEMI OMOLEYE JAMES SHEHU ABIRIYI SAIDU TANKO
More informationAjiroghene Aruga Esq, for the Applicant A. N. Shuru Esq for the Party seeking to be Joined. RULING
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY IN THE ABUJA JUDICIAL DIVISION HOLDEN AT ABUJA ON THE 11 TH OF JUNE, 2013 BEFORE THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE A. B. MOHAMMED SUIT NO. FCT/HC/CV/599/12 BETWEEN:
More informationRULING. i.e. whether having regard to the circumstances of this case the applicant is entitled to the Court s discretion ion in granting
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY HOLDEN AT HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE APO ABUJA ON THE 4 TH DAY OF JULY, 2013 BEFORE HIS LORDSHIP: - HON. JUSTICE M.A NASIR COURT NO.:- HIGH COURT TWENTY TWO
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF NIGERIA HOLDEN AT ABUJA ON FRIDAY THE 19 TH DAY OF JULY, 2013 BEFORE THEIR LORDSHIPS
Hotel Licensing and other related matters Powers of Lagos State House of Assembly to legislate on Constitutionality of ALOMA MARIAM MUKHTAR IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NIGERIA HOLDEN AT ABUJA ON FRIDAY THE
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY IN THE ABUJA JUDICIAL DIVISION HOLDEN AT WUSE ZONE 2 ABUJA FCT/HC/CV/1072/2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY IN THE ABUJA JUDICIAL DIVISION HOLDEN AT WUSE ZONE 2 ABUJA BEFORE HIS LORDSHIP: HON.JUSTICE D.Z. SENCHI COURT CLERKS: TSENYEN P. SALLAH COURT NUMBER:
More informationCURRENT FEATURES OF THE SUMMARY JUDGEMENT PROCEDURE UNDER THE HIGH COURT OF LAGOS STATE (CIVIL PROCEDURE) RULES 2004 *
CURRENT FEATURES OF THE SUMMARY JUDGEMENT PROCEDURE UNDER THE HIGH COURT OF LAGOS STATE (CIVIL PROCEDURE) RULES 2004 * The declared objective of the 2004 Lagos High Court Civil Procedure Rules is the achievement
More informationArbitration and Conciliation Act Cap A18, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004, as agreed in Clause 15 of the Haulage Agreement dated 1 st December
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY IN THE ABUJA JUDICIAL DIVISION HOLDEN AT ABUJA BEFORE HIS LORDSHIP, HON. JUSTICE A.A.I. BANJOKO-JUDGE DATED 1 ST DAY OF NOVEMBER 2013 SUIT NO: -FCT/HC/CV/1056/2011
More informationArbitration and Conciliation Act 1988 (Section 5): Pinning the Nigerian Courts to the Era of Demurrer
International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Vol. 3 No. 11; June 2013 Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1988 (Section 5): Pinning the Nigerian Courts to the Era of Demurrer Abstract Khafayat Yetunde
More information(2017) LPELR-42664(CA)
WARRI REFINING & PETROCHEMICAL CO. LTD v. GECMEP (NIG) LTD CITATION: JIMI OLUKAYODE BADA PHILOMENA MBUA EKPE In the Court of Appeal In the Benin Judicial Division Holden at Benin ON WEDNESDAY, 5TH JULY,
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF THE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY IN THE ABUJA JUDICIAL DIVISION (APPELLATE DIVISION) HOLDEN AT APO, ABUJA DATED 21/03/13
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY IN THE ABUJA JUDICIAL DIVISION (APPELLATE DIVISION) HOLDEN AT APO, ABUJA DATED 21/03/13 BEFORE THEIR LORDSHIPS: HON. JUSTICE U.P. KEKEMEKE (PRESIDING
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF THE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY HOLDEN AT GWAGWALADA BEFORE HIS LORDSHIP.HON. JUSTICE M.BALAMI COURT CLERK..
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY HOLDEN AT GWAGWALADA SUIT NO: FCT /HC/GWD/CV/585/11 BEFORE HIS LORDSHIP.HON. JUSTICE M.BALAMI COURT CLERK..PAUL OJILE BETWEEN ZIP SYSTEM LTD &2 ORS.PLAINTIFFS/RESPONDENTS
More information(2018) LPELR-45445(CA)
KAWU v. CHIEF SHERIFF, KEBBI STATE & ANOR CITATION: HUSSEIN MUKHTAR In the Court of Appeal In the Sokoto Judicial Division Holden at Sokoto MUHAMMED LAWAL SHUAIBU FREDERICK OZIAKPONO OHO ON THURSDAY, 12TH
More information(2018) LPELR-44252(CA)
IKURAV (NIG) LTD & ANOR v. MADUGU & ORS CITATION: In the Court of Appeal In the Makurdi Judicial Division Holden at Makurdi JUMMAI HANNATU SANKEY ONYEKACHI AJA OTISI JOSEPH EYO EKANEM 1. IKURAV (NIG) LTD
More informationJUDGEMENT. (Delivered by KUMAI BAYANG AKAAI-IS, JSC) High Court, Ikeja Division on 8/8/2008. The charge was amended Oil /2008
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NIGERIA HOLDEN AT ABUJA ON FRIDAY, THE 13 TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2013 BEFORE THEIR LORDSHIPS:- MAHMUD MOHAMMED MOHAMMED S. MUNTAKA-COOMASSIE JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI NWALI SYLVESTER NGWUTA
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE DAVID BICKFORD ST LUCIA ESTATES LIMITED
SAINT LUCIA IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE SUIT NO:864/99 BETWEEN: DAVID BICKFORD Petitioner VS ST LUCIA ESTATES LIMITED Respondent Appearance Mr. K. Monplaisir Q.C. with Mr. M. Maraj for Petitioner Mr.
More information(2018) LPELR-45327(CA)
MV CORAL GEM & ORS v. OISEOMAYE & ORS CITATION: TIJJANI ABUBAKAR In the Court of Appeal In the Lagos Judicial Division Holden at Lagos ON WEDNESDAY, 13TH JUNE, 2018 Suit No: CA/L/492/2014 BIOBELE ABRAHAM
More information(2017) LPELR-42702(CA)
SIJUADE v. ELUGBINDIN & 3 ORS. CITATION: In the Court of Appeal In the Akure Judicial Division Holden at Akure ON MONDAY, 15TH MAY, 2017 Suit No: CA/AK/48/2014 Before Their Lordships: UZO IFEYINWA NDUKWE-ANYANWU
More informationGeneral Learning outcomes:
Course Contents: CIVIL LITIGATION 1. Methods of civil dispute resolution, 2. Sources of civil procedure 3. Courts with civil jurisdiction. 4. Parties 5. Pre-action issues. 6. Commencement of Action in
More informationRULING. This is a motion on notice wherein the judgment debtor/applicant seeks the following reliefs:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY IN THE ABUJA JUDICIAL DIVISION HOLDEN AT ABUJA ON THE 15TH DAY OF JULY 2013 SUIT NO. FCT/HC/M/8912/13 BEFORE HIS LORDSHIP HONOURABLE JUSTICE FOLASADE
More informationBEFORE HIS LORDSHIP HON JUSTICE CHIZOBA N. OJI PRESIDING JUDGE IBRAHIM DOMA WOKILI PLAINTIFF
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY ABUJA. IN THE ABUJA JUDICIAL DIVISION HOLDEN AT WUSE ABUJA ON THE 5 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2013 BEFORE HIS LORDSHIP HON JUSTICE CHIZOBA N. OJI
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF THE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY, ABUJA HOLDEN AT ABUIA ON TUESDAY, 8TH DAY OF MARCH, 2011 BEFORE HON. JUSTICE SYLV ANUS RULING
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY, ABUJA HOLDEN AT ABUIA ON TUESDAY, 8TH DAY OF MARCH, 2011 BEFORE HON. JUSTICE SYLV ANUS C. ORIll SUIT NO. FCT/HC/CV/217/2008 MOTION MOTION NO. M/4750/2009
More information(2017) LPELR-42284(CA)
AGWALOGU & ORS v. TURA INT'L LTD NIGERIA & ORS CITATION: In the Court of Appeal In the Owerri Judicial Division Holden at Owerri ON THURSDAY, 23RD MARCH, 2017 Suit No: CA/OW/217/2010 Before Their Lordships:
More informationJUDGMENT. The plaintiff claims against the defendant as follows:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY HOLDEN AT HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE WUSE ABUJA ON THE 14 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2013 BEFORE HIS LORDSHIP: HON. JUSTICE M.M. KOLO COURT NO. HIGH COURT THIRTY
More information(2017) LPELR-42383(CA)
FIRST BANK OF NIGERIA PLC. v. ALDAR & CO.LTD. & ANOR CITATION: In the Court of Appeal In the Ibadan Judicial Division Holden at Ibadan ON FRIDAY, 17TH MARCH, 2017 Suit No: CA/I/76/2010 Before Their Lordships:
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF THE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY ABUJA IN THE ABUJA JUDICIAL DIVISION HOLDEN AT APO ABUJA ON THE 1 ST DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY ABUJA IN THE ABUJA JUDICIAL DIVISION HOLDEN AT APO ABUJA ON THE 1 ST DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2013 BEFORE HIS LORDSHIP HON. JUSTICE CHIZOBA N. OJI PRESIDING JUDGE
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL WHITE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LIMITED. and DCG PROPERTIES LIMITED. 2011: July 25, 26; September 26.
SAINT LUCIA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL HCVAP 2010/022 BETWEEN: WHITE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LIMITED and DCG PROPERTIES LIMITED Before: The Hon. Mr. Hugh A. Rawlins The Hon. Mde. Ola Mae Edwards The Hon. Mde.
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, FREE ST ATE DIVISION, BLOEMFONTEIN HEARD ON: 2 FEBRUARY 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, FREE ST ATE DIVISION, BLOEMFONTEIN Reportable: YES/NO Of Interest to other Judges: YES/NO Circulate to Magistrates: YES/NO In the matter between: Case No.: 51092016 FIDELITY
More informationFederal High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules 2000
Federal High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules 2000 Commencement: 1st May 2000 In exercise of the powers conferred on me by section 254 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 and all powers
More informationUNILATERAL DISPUTE RESOLUTION CLAUSES IN FINANCING AGREEMENTS: STRUCTURE & ENFORCEMENT
UNILATERAL DISPUTE RESOLUTION CLAUSES IN FINANCING AGREEMENTS: STRUCTURE & ENFORCEMENT Paper delivered at ESQ International Finance School 14 th October 2016. Kolawole Mayomi Partner, Dispute Resolution
More information(2018) LPELR-45114(CA)
ASHIMIYU v. BOLAJI & ORS CITATION: In the Court of Appeal In the Lagos Judicial Division Holden at Lagos MOHAMMED LAWAL GARBA JOSEPH SHAGBAOR IKYEGH YARGATA BYENCHIT NIMPAR ON FRIDAY, 8TH JUNE, 2018 Suit
More informationMOTION NO: FCT/HC/M/9227/13 BETWEEN: CHUKWU CHRISTIAN NWEKE JUDGMENT CREDITOR/ RESPONDENT AND MOSES NWOBODO...JUDGMENT DEBTOR/ APPLICANT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY IN THE ABUJA JUDICIAL DIVISION HOLDEN AT ABUJA BEFORE HIS LORDSHIP, HON. JUSTICE A.A.I BANJOKO JUDGE MOTION NO: FCT/HC/M/9227/13 BETWEEN: CHUKWU CHRISTIAN
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF BELIZE AD of an application for leave to apply for Judicial Review NORMAN CHARLES RODRIGUEZ
CLAIM NO 275 OF 2014 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BELIZE AD 2014 IN THE MATTER of an application for leave to apply for Judicial Review AND IN THE MATTER of section 13 of the Belize City Council Act, Cap 85
More informationArbitration Law, Updated to March 2015
Law, 1968- Updated to March 2015 Chapter One: Interpretation 1. For purposes this law - agreement A written agreement to refer to arbitration a dispute which has arisen between the parties to the agreement
More informationABSA BANK LIMITED Plaintiff AND
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (WESTERN CAPE HIGH COURT, CAPE TOWN) Case No.: 8850/2011 In the matter between: ABSA BANK LIMITED Plaintiff and ROBERT DOUGLAS MARSHALL GAVIN JOHN WHITEFORD N.O. GLORIA
More information(2018) LPELR-44058(CA)
UBA PLC v. ACCESS BANK & ANOR CITATION: HUSSEIN MUKHTAR In the Court of Appeal In the Sokoto Judicial Division Holden at Sokoto ON FRIDAY, 2ND FEBRUARY, 2018 Suit No: CA/S/21/2017 MUHAMMED LAWAL SHUAIBU
More information(2017) LPELR-43312(CA)
SHETIMA v. GADAL & ORS CITATION: ADZIRA GANA MSHELIA UCHECHUKWU ONYEMENAM In the Court of Appeal In the Jos Judicial Division Holden at Jos ON FRIDAY, 2ND JUNE, 2017 Suit No: CA/J/73M/2017(R) Before Their
More informationRULES GOVERNING THE COURTS OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY RULE 5:5. PRETRIAL PROCEDURES AND PROCEDURES RELATING TO CERTAIN JUDGMENTS
RULES GOVERNING THE COURTS OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY RULE 5:5. PRETRIAL PROCEDURES AND PROCEDURES RELATING TO CERTAIN JUDGMENTS Rule 5:5-1. Discovery Except for summary actions and except as otherwise
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF THE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY IN THE ABUJA JUDICIAL DIVISION HOLDEN AT ABUJA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY IN THE ABUJA JUDICIAL DIVISION HOLDEN AT ABUJA ON THE 7 TH DAY OF MAY 2013 SUIT NO. FCT/HC/CV/2055/11 M/2997/12 BEFORE HIS LORDSHIP: HONOURABLE JUSTICE
More informationIN THE EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. and LAMBERT JAMES-SOOMER. and LAMBERT JAMES-SOOMER
SAINT LUCIA IN THE EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CLAIM NO.: SLUHCV 2003/0138 BETWEEN (1) MICHELE STEPHENSON (2) MAHALIA MARS (Qua Administratrices of the Estate of ANTHONY
More informationA guide to civil litigation and arbitration in Hong Kong, from a Mainland perspective
A guide to litigation and arbitration in Hong Kong October 12014 A guide to civil litigation and arbitration in Hong Kong, from a Mainland perspective 1. Brief description of the civil litigation process
More informationJurisdiction of The Courts in Labour And Trade Union Matters
Jurisdiction of The Courts in Labour And Trade Union Matters By YUSUF O. ALI, SAN Introduction In tackling this topic, recourse will be had to the following statutes, viz the Labour Act Cap 198 Laws of
More information(2016) LPELR-40165(CA)
MOUDKAS NIG ENT. LTD & ORS v. OBIOMA & ORS CITATION: UZO I. NDUKWE-ANYANWU JOSEPH SHAGBAOR IKYEGH SAMUEL CHUKWUDUMEBI OSEJI In the Court of Appeal In the Lagos Judicial Division Holden at Lagos ON FRIDAY,
More information(2016) LPELR-40227(CA)
DILLI v. ADAMU & ANOR CITATION: MOORE ASEIMO A. ADUMEIN TANI YUSUF HASSAN JOSEPH EYO EKANEM In the Court of Appeal In the Abuja Judicial Division Holden at Abuja ON TUESDAY, 8TH MARCH, 2016 Suit No: CA/A/236/2008
More informationMASSACHUSETTS STATUTES (source: CHAPTER 204. GENERAL PROVISIONS RELATIVE TO SALES, MORTGAGES, RELEASES, COMPROMISES, ETC.
MASSACHUSETTS STATUTES (source: www.mass.gov) CHAPTER 204. GENERAL PROVISIONS RELATIVE TO SALES, MORTGAGES, RELEASES, COMPROMISES, ETC., BY EXECUTORS, ETC. GENERAL PROVISIONS. Chapter 204, Section 1. Specific
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA
1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA Case No. S.C. (Writ) 01/2014 In the matter of an application for Orders in the nature of Writs of Certiorari and Prohibition under
More information(2018) LPELR-45450(CA)
IBRAHIM & ANOR v. YARBAWA CITATION: HUSSEIN MUKHTAR In the Court of Appeal In the Sokoto Judicial Division Holden at Sokoto MUHAMMED LAWAL SHUAIBU FREDERICK OZIAKPONO OHO ON FRIDAY, 13TH JULY, 2018 Suit
More informationNICK S FISHMONGER HOLDINGS (PTY) LTD ALMON MANUEL ALVES DE SOUSA DEFENDANT CLAIM AND COUNTERCLAIM IN CONTRACT CONTRACT PROVIDING
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (SOUTH EASTERN CAPE LOCAL DIVISION) CASE NO: 1606/01 IN THE MATTER BETWEEN: NICK S FISHMONGER HOLDINGS (PTY) LTD PLAINTIFF AND ALMON MANUEL ALVES DE SOUSA DEFENDANT CLAIM
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. PAN AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO LIMITED Defendant
THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Claim No. CV2015-003645 BETWEEN MAHARAJ 2002 LIMITED Claimant AND PAN AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO LIMITED Defendant
More informationREPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG JUDGMENT
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA, JOHANNESBURG JUDGMENT Not Reportable Case no: J1982/2013 In the matter between: NUMSA obo MEMBERS Applicant And MURRAY AND ROBERTS PROJECTS First
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN BRIAN MOORE. And PUBLIC SERVICES CREDIT UNION CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED
THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CV 2010-03257 BETWEEN BRIAN MOORE Claimant And PUBLIC SERVICES CREDIT UNION CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED Defendant Before the Honourable
More informationTHE REGISTERED TRUSTEES OF IGBO COMMUNITY, OYO STATE v. CYRIL AKABUEZE AND TWO OTHERS HIGH COURT IBADAN OYO STATE
THE REGISTERED TRUSTEES OF IGBO COMMUNITY, OYO STATE v. CYRIL AKABUEZE AND TWO OTHERS HIGH COURT IBADAN OYO STATE 1/568/96 J.O. IGE, J. Friday, 30 th June 2000. FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS Freedom of Association
More information(2017) 3 Journal of the Mooting Society University of Lagos AGIP (NIG.) LTD V. AGIP PETROLI INT L (2010) 5NWLR PT. 1187
AGIP (NIG.) LTD V. AGIP PETROLI INT L (2010) 5NWLR PT. 1187 MISTHURA OTUBU * 1.0 INTRODUCTION There are three categories of proceedings that may be brought by minority shareholders for the purpose of prosecuting,
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF THE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY HOLDEN AT MAITAMA BEFORE HIS LORDSHIP: HON. JUSTICE A. S. UMAR RULING
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY HOLDEN AT MAITAMA BEFORE HIS LORDSHIP: HON. JUSTICE A. S. UMAR MOTION NO: FCT/HC/M/178/13 BETWEEN: CORNELIUS NWAPI - JUDGEMENT CREDITOR VS MR. OLATOKUNBO
More informationDepartment of Labor Relations TABLE OF CONTENTS. Connecticut State Labor Relations Act. Article I. Description of Organization and Definitions
Relations TABLE OF CONTENTS Connecticut State Labor Relations Act Article I Description of Organization and Definitions Creation and authority....................... 31-101- 1 Functions.................................
More informationCHAPTER 32:10 ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS
SECTION CHAPTER 32:10 ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS 1. Short title 2. Interpretation 3. Power of the President to acquire property 4. Preliminary investigations 5. Notice of intention
More informationSINGAPORE INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION CENTRE (SIAC)
GUIDE TO INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION IN SINGAPORE INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION CENTRE (SIAC) Written By S. Ravi Shankar Advocate on Record - Supreme Court of India National President of Arbitration Bar of India
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA FREE STATE DIVISION, BLOEMFONTEIN STANDARD BANK OF SOUTH AFRICA LIMITED
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA FREE STATE DIVISION, BLOEMFONTEIN In the matter between: Case No.: 3048/2015 STANDARD BANK OF SOUTH AFRICA LIMITED Plaintiff And JOROY 0004 CC t/a UBUNTU PROCUREM 1 st
More information(2018) LPELR-45308(CA)
EPE RESORTS & SPA LTD v. UBA PLC CITATION: TIJJANI ABUBAKAR In the Court of Appeal In the Lagos Judicial Division Holden at Lagos ON THURSDAY, 5TH JULY, 2018 Suit No: CA/L/799/2014 BIOBELE ABRAHAM GEORGEWILL
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY IN THE ABUJA JUDICIAL DIVISION HOLDEN AT MAITAMA ABUJA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY IN THE ABUJA JUDICIAL DIVISION HOLDEN AT MAITAMA ABUJA BEFORE HIS LORDSHIP: HON. JUSTICE SALISU GARBA COURT CLERKS: BWALA NATHAN & OTHERS COURT NUMBER:
More informationTHE JURISPRUDENCE OF INSTITUTING AN ACTION AGAINST AN UNKNOWN PERSON:
THE JURISPRUDENCE OF INSTITUTING AN ACTION AGAINST AN UNKNOWN PERSON: A PAPER PRESENTED BY: HON. JUSTICE P.A.AKHIHIERO LL.B (HONS) IFE; LL.M LAGOS; B.L. EDO STATE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE ON MONDAY,1 ST AUGUST,2016.
More informationBEFORE HIS LORDSHIP HON. JUSTICE CHIZOBA N. OJI PRESIDING JUDGE MOTION NO: M\9217\11 BETWEEN:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE FEDERAL CAPITALTERRITORY ABUJA IN THE ABUJA JUDICIAL DIVISION HOLDEN AT WUSE ZONE 2 FCT ABUJA ON THE 28 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2013 BEFORE HIS LORDSHIP HON. JUSTICE CHIZOBA N. OJI
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF BELIZE, A.D BT TRADING LIMITED GEORGE POPESCU ALPHA SERVICES LIMITED
CLAIM NO. 325 OF 2014 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BELIZE, A.D. 2014 BETWEEN: KEVIN MILLIEN Claimant AND BT TRADING LIMITED GEORGE POPESCU ALPHA SERVICES LIMITED 1 st Defendant 2 nd Defendant 3 rd Defendant
More informationFIJI ISLANDS HIGH COURT ACT (CHAPTER 13) HIGH COURT (AMENDMENT) RULES 1998
FIJI ISLANDS HIGH COURT ACT (CHAPTER 13) HIGH COURT (AMENDMENT) RULES 1998 IN exercise of the powers conferred upon me by Section 25 of the High Court Act, I hereby make the following Rules: Citation 1.
More informationBERMUDA RULES OF THE COURT OF APPEAL FOR BERMUDA BX 1 / 1965
QUO FA T A F U E R N T BERMUDA RULES OF THE COURT OF APPEAL FOR BERMUDA BX 1 / 1965 [made under section 9 of the Court of Appeal Act 1964 and brought into operation on 2 August 1965] TABLE OF CONTENTS
More information(2018) LPELR-45265(CA)
GARBA & ANOR v. SAMINU & ANOR CITATION: HUSSEIN MUKHTAR In the Court of Appeal In the Sokoto Judicial Division Holden at Sokoto ON WEDNESDAY, 11TH JULY, 2018 Suit No: CA/S/31S/2017 MUHAMMED LAWAL SHUAIBU
More informationThe Specific Relief Act, 1963
The Specific Relief Act, 1963 [47 OF 1963] SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT, 1963 [47 OF 1963] An Act to define and amend the law relating to certain kinds of specific relief. BE it enacted by Parliament in the Fourteenth
More information(2018) LPELR-43792(CA)
ALHAJI HASSAN BELLO & SONS LTD & ANOR v. ZENITH BANK CITATION: HUSSEIN MUKHTAR In the Court of Appeal In the Sokoto Judicial Division Holden at Sokoto ON FRIDAY, 2ND FEBRUARY, 2018 Suit No: CA/S/87/2015
More informationCOURT OF APPEAL RULES, 1997 (C.I 19)
COURT OF APPEAL RULES, 1997 (C.I 19) IN exercise of the powers conferred on the Rules of Court Committee by Article 157(2) of the Constitution these Rules are made this 24th day of July, 1997. PART I-GENERAL
More information(2016) LPELR-40572(CA)
MAINSTREET BANK REGISTRARS LTD v. PROMISE CITATION: SIDI DAUDA BAGE In the Court of Appeal In the Lagos Judicial Division Holden at Lagos JOSEPH SHAGBAOR IKYEGH ON TUESDAY, 22ND MARCH, 2016 Suit No: CA/L/1157/2014
More informationPART 1 SCOPE AND INTERPRETATION...
ADGM Court Procedure Rules 2016 Table of Contents PART 1 SCOPE AND INTERPRETATION... 1 1. Citation and commencement... 1 2. Scope and objective... 1 3. Interpretation... 1 4. Court documents... 4 5. Forms...
More informationDUBAI INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION CENTRE RULES 2007 AS OF 22 ND FEBRUARY Introductory Provisions. Article (1) Definitions
DUBAI INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION CENTRE RULES 2007 AS OF 22 ND FEBRUARY 2011 Introductory Provisions Article (1) Definitions 1.1 The following words and phrases shall have the meaning assigned thereto unless
More information(2016) LPELR-40290(CA)
LAWAL v. OAU ILE-IFE CITATION: MOJEED ADEKUNLE OWOADE MOHAMMED AMBI-USI DANJUMA JAMES SHEHU ABIRIYI In the Court of Appeal In the Akure Judicial Division Holden at Akure ON THURSDAY, 14TH APRIL, 2016 Suit
More informationJUDGMENT. Sagicor Bank Jamaica Limited (Appellant) v Taylor-Wright (Respondent) (Jamaica)
Easter Term [2018] UKPC 12 Privy Council Appeal No 0011 of 2017 JUDGMENT Sagicor Bank Jamaica Limited (Appellant) v Taylor-Wright (Respondent) (Jamaica) From the Court of Appeal of Jamaica before Lord
More information(2018) LPELR-45112(CA)
MONSOUR v. FRN CITATION: In the Court of Appeal In the Lagos Judicial Division Holden at Lagos ON MONDAY, 21ST MAY, 2018 Suit No: CA/L/234CM/2018(R) MOHAMMED LAWAL GARBA JOSEPH SHAGBAOR IKYEGH YARGATA
More informationDEFAULT JUDGMENTS: SETTING ASIDE
DEFAULT JUDGMENTS: SETTING ASIDE ISBN 983-3519-05-9 Author: Nasser Hamid Binding: Softcover/Extent: 575 pp Publication Price: MYR 200.00 The law is stated as of August 31, 2006 CHAPTER 1 RULES OF COURT
More information(2018) LPELR-44186(CA)
CASCADE CONTROLS LTD & ANOR v. THE PORT HARCOURT CHAMBERS OF COMMERCE & ORS CITATION: In the Court of Appeal In the Port Harcourt Judicial Division Holden at Port Harcourt ISAIAH OLUFEMI AKEJU ON MONDAY,
More informationPrem Lala Nahata & Anr vs Chandi Prasad Sikaria on 2 February, 2007
Supreme Court of India Prem Lala Nahata & Anr vs Chandi Prasad Sikaria on 2 February, 2007 Author: P Balasubramanyan Bench: S.B. Sinha, P.K. Balasubramanyan CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 446 of 2007 PETITIONER:
More information