IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY HOLDEN AT GWAGWALADA BEFORE HIS LORDSHIP.HON. JUSTICE M.BALAMI COURT CLERK..
|
|
- Anabel Howard
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 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 AND OMOMAYOWA CO LTD &1OR DEFENDANTS/APPLICANTS Parties absent Umar Musa for the plaintiffs/respondents D.M.B Orji for the Defendants/applicants COURT RULING The Honorable court upon reading/hearing motion on notice dated the 24 th day of May 2012 filed on the brought pursuant to order 7, rules (1&2) order , and under the inherent jurisdiction of the Honourable court. The motion which seeks reliefs 1-2 set out on the face of the motion paper, particularly reliefs (1) which states that
2 (1) An order of interlocutory injunction restraining the plaintiff/respondent, their agents, workmen or representatives from forcefully entering, trespassing and or disturbing of quiet possession and or disturbing and enjoyment of the property known as Block 1 of God s own Estate located in plot No: 45 of Wumba District Apo Abuja, otherwise than by the order of the Honourable court pending the determination of the substantive case. (2) And for such further orders as the Honourable court may deem fit to make in the circumstance of this suit. the Honourable court also having gone through a paragraphs affidavit deposed to by one DR. R. N. Owoyemi the managing Director, and chief Executive officer of the 1 st defendant/ applicant in this suit dated the same , the annexure, so also the affidavit of urgency, which is 6. Paragraph deposed to by the same deponent, so also the counsel written address, which discussed, the motion on notice filed before the Honourable court the reliefs sought and Exhibit A having placed reliance on all the paragraphs of the affidavit so also the Exhibits and all the issues for determination which states whether the defendant/applicant is entitled to the grant of this application. The legal argument which ran thus: interlocutory injunction is granted to preserve and protect the right of parties before the court from destruction by either party to the case or where the right of a party has been threatened see Obeya Memorial Hospital Vs. AGF (1987)3 NWLR (PT60)325, KotoyeVs. CBN (1989)1 NWLR (PT 98)419 and from the
3 foregoing authorities the following factors guide the grant or refusal of interlocutory injunction which are as follows: (a) The existence of legal right (b) Whether there are triable issues before the court (c) Balance of convenience (d) Whether damages will assuage the injury the applicant will suffer if the order is not granted. (e) Undertaking to pay damages. See KotoyeVs. CBN (supra) Obeyamemorial Hospital Vs. AGF. That on the 1 st factor, pray the Honorable court to hold that the applicant has established the existence of a legal right in the subject matter sought to be protected in as much as the 1 st defendant/applicant herein is the rightful owner of the subject matter of the application see paragraphs 3&4 of the affidavit in support, having been allocated same by the 2 nd defendant for Mass housing scheme, also a very close perusal of amended statement of claim of the plaintiff/ Respondent shows that the plaintiff/respondent are not claiming the ownership/title or any interest in the subject matter, and not part of the alleged transaction leading to the instant suit hence the applicant has established its legal in the subject matter of this application. On the 2 nd leg, existence of triable issues pray the Honorable court to hold that the plaintiff/respondent amended statement of claim of defence of the 1 st defendant/applicant so also the affidavit in support established that the ownership of or interest in plot No:86, 90 and 93
4 and as such there are serious issues to be tried, by the Honorable court hence the main suit is not frivolous hence the issue before the Honorable court is bordering on title of aforesaid plots. On the 3 rd leg balance of convenience pray the Honorable court to hold that the purpose of injunction is to inter alia present any threatened wrong or apprehend waste or trespass see AdewaleVs.Adeshino(1990)2 NWLR (PT 431) Page 391. That the plaintiff/respondent stand to lose nothing if this application is granted as the subject matter in this application does not form part of the plot being litigated by the parties but that if the continuous act of trespass or interference by the plaintiff/respondent is not restrained, it will affect and disrupt the mass housing scheme for which the plot is allocated to the 1 st defendant/applicant by the 2 nd defendant and thus will affect the occupation of the said property/building by the applicant or their agents and same will occasion a breach of public peace, chaos and anarchy in the Estate see paragraph 6 of the affidavit in support. On the issue of award of damages at the end of the trial the plaintiff/respondent if the plaintiff/respondent are not restrained it will affect the whole mass housing scheme which has run in millions of Naira beyond the financial capability of the plaintiff/respondent. That on the last leg, the 1 st defendant/respondent if upon the grant of same the order turns out to be frivolous, praying the Honorable court to grant this application that it is the interest of justice to check and abate the lawlessness of the plaintiff/respondent or their agents.
5 The Honorable court also having gone through the 27 paragraph counter affidavit deposed to by one Jacinta Okoye a legal practitioner in the law firm of Zion Chambers of D.M.B Orji & Associate, so also the reply opposing the grant of this application (address) which also discussed the introduction, the motion filed before the Honorable court on the , the rules of the Honorable court under which the application is brought order 1 rule 1 and order 31 rule 1&2rules of the Honorable court 2004,the reliefs 1-2 sought before the Honorable court and the issues raised for determination by the plaintiff/respondent as to: (1) whether the defendant/applicant disclosed all the facts of the case to enable the court grant him the reliefs sought and as to whether release can be made on a matter that is lispendisand also whether balance of conveniencelispendis and undertaking to pay damage are fundamental factors to be considered before the grant of an injunction. The argument on issue No.1 The need to disclose all facts in application for injunction and effect of failure to do so, praying the Honorable court to hold that in the instant case the applicants deliberately suppressed factssee Adeyemi works construction Ltd VsOmolehin (2004)6 NWLR(PT870)at 650 also paragraph 3&4 of the affidavit in support of the motion are contrary with the paragraph 51 where the plaintiff sought for an order of court to sell Block 1, in plot45 Wumba District in God s own Estate Abuja, see also paragraph 48 of the plaintiff s statement of claim, which avers that
6 since demolition in 2010, the 1 st defendant had sold more than 10 buildings within the Estate which non is less than N30,000,000.00(Thirty million Naira)which the defendant refused to compensate the plaintiff as promised and that if the application is granted the 1 st defendant will dispose the said Block 1 in God s own Estate Apo Abuja. That it is trite law that in any application for injunction the facts of the case must be disclosed and failure to do that the court will refuse the application. That the defendant/applicant wants to deceive the court by virtue of his affidavit in support of the motion which suppressed facts of this case praying the Honorable court to decide issue No.1 in favour of the plaintiff/respondent that facts of the case were not disclosed. On the issue whether injunction can be granted on a subject matter that is lispendis meaning pending law suit, it denotes the jurisdiction power or control acquired by a court over property during the pendency of an action or suit which is usually recovered in claim of title to real property required or permitted in certain common law jurisdiction to warn all parties that certain property is subject of a litigation or law suit and that any interest that may be acquired during the pendency of the case are subject to its caution, which is also termed notice of lispendes or notice of pending suit which is synonymous as such terms as pendes lite cite pendes and that the purported essence of the doctrine of lispendes (pendes lite)is that parties in a proceeding in court must not do anything
7 which may have the effect of rendering nugatory the ultimate judgment of the court. On issue 2 Whether the balance of convenience, lispendes and undertaking in damages are fundamental factors to be considered before granting an injunction and what application for interlocutory application needs to establish is as follows: (1) The existence of legal right in the application (2) The presence of triable issues in the matter (3) That the balance of convenience in the suit tilts in favour of the applicant. (4) That damages will not adequately compensate the applicant if the injunction sought to be restrained occurred and the principle guiding the grant of same is also set out on the face of the written address numbered A-E. On the issue of legal right of the applicant, the most important condition is for applicant to show that he has a legal right which is threatened and ought to be protected, hence it follows that the court has no power to grant an injunction where the applicant has not established a recognizable legal right, which the establishment of same in sine quo non and the condition precedent for the grant of some equitable remedy/relief see AkpoVs Hakeem Habeeb (1992) 6 NWLR PT247.
8 Praying the Honorable court to hold that in the instant case, the defendant/applicant has not shown to this court thus his legal right for the grant of this application, or that his right has been infringed upon to enable the Honorable court granting this application. On the issue of relevant consideration in weighing the balance of convenience between the parties in an application of such a nature (interlocutory injunction) is where there is a doubt as to the inadequacy of damages available to the other party or both that the question of balance of convenience rises the extent of disadvantage to each party would be incapable of being compensated in damages in event of his succeeding at the trial which is a significant factor asking where balance of convenience lies. This can be considered on the very relevant factors of compensating available damages see ItaVsNyowa (1994)1 NWLR (PT 318) that balance of convenience between parties is the basic determinant factor in an application of such nature and in doing so the law requires same requirement of scale of justice to see where the pendulum tilts. The law does not require mathematical exactness which results to disadvantage to one or otherwise, which damages cannot compensate i.e defined as balance of justice see FrancomeVsMirror Group of Newspaper Limited which sir John Donaldson called balance of justice, and that the applicant must show that the balance of convenience is on his side, which means more justice will result in granting the application than refusing it.
9 i.e.will the applicant suffer more inconvenience if the application is not granted and the meaning of same cannot be better put than the definition given in the case of CBN VsAwogbovo by Tobi JSC that onus of proving the balance of convenience is on the side of the applicant which is important factor in land cases and the stage at which the plaintiff moves could be a decisive factor and the question is will the applicant suffer more damages /inconvenience if the application is not granted which the answer is no and that it is the respondent who will suffer more inconvenience in that the defendant/applicant states that what is left for him is only Block 1 plot 45 Wumba Estate and that if the application is granted he will dispose the building and if the outcome of this case is in favour of the plaintiff/respondent then it will render the judgment nugatory. On the issue of principle of guiding the consideration of damage in a case for application of such a nature to succeed in his claim he could not be adequately compensated by award of damages against the respondent and that undertaking to pay cost/damages is not a prima facie that can be granted. On the issue No 3 Whether the issue of speedy trial in lieu of interlocutory injunction will not do more justice that the grant of an injunction, pray the Honorable court to hold that speedy trial is an essential element of law as justice delayed is justice denied and matters are delayed in court because of such applications, particularly parties failed to take advantage of the
10 provisions of rules of court which makes court to make orders and order for accelerated hearing instead of making applications of such a nature see order 31 rule 5 of the high court civil procedure rule so also 31 rule 2 of the same rules. On the issue whether the accelerated hearing instead of granting an order of interlocutory injunction which in most cases such application the justice of the case can quite often be met by accelerating the hearing instead of granting such an order. In that successful applicant for interlocutory injunction simply keeps in status quo until completion of hearing but that successful hearing disposes off the matter for good and the better in that in the accelerated hearing instead of wading through massive affidavit and hearing of lengthy arguments on such an application that the court should accelerate the hearing and decide finally on the right of the parties see OnyesonVsNnebedum (1992)3 NWLR (PT229)315, AkpoVs. Hakeem (1992)6NWLR 247,266, see also ACB LTD VS Awogboro (1996) 3 NWLR(PT 347) at page382 at 407,per Mohammed JSC at page 408 paragraph A-E it is quite clear that the opinion taken by the plaintiff/applicant is abandoning the chance to prove his case given an accelerated hearing to pursue appeal to this court for restoration of an interim expert order of injunction is not a wise decision this in taking into consideration that the main relief in the substantive action in an order of perpetual injunction against the defendant / respondent restraining them from committing various acts in breach of the right of appellant in connection to registered trade mark and design, that accelerated hearing of the matter given could have
11 settle once and for all the respective right of the parties at trial, all that instead of the applicant ask for same, had to spend the more 10years chasing an interlocutory injunction up to the supreme court. On the issue of discretionary power of court to grant application of such a nature, vice versa the actionable of applicant in court the issue of such an order is purely at the discretion of court which should be exercised judiciously and judicially, and once the court is satisfied that the principle of law of application of such a nature has been met, i.e. The grant and refusal of such application by court of law, is always to protect the exercise of the discretionary power that a judicial discretion properly exercise ought to be found upon the facts and circumstances presented to court, which a conclusion guided by the law will have to be drawn, and that it judicial discretion has been exercised bona fide not arbitrarily or illegally by court law an appeal court will not interfere with the exercise. That the decision of granting accelerated hearing instead of granting the order is order is at the discretion of the court that should be exercised judiciouslyand judicially see D.P.C.C LTD VS B.P.C LTD (2008)4 NWLR (PT 1077) at Praying the honorable court to hold, that in view of the above submission and authorities cited therein, it is clear that balance of convenience is on the side of the plaintiff /respondent, who has lost so much money to the defendant applicant and that the grant of this application will definitely render the outcome of this suit nugatory in view of aforementioned reasons praying the honorable court to acceleration the hearing of this case the Honorable court is of the
12 view that the essence of grant of an order of interlocutory injunction is to preserve the res (the subject matter in dispute before the court that is in litigation, so as to give its judgment an effect see NJC VS F.C.L CO LTD (2007)2 NWLR (PT 1019) 610 at 628 paragraph G - H which the Honorable court is now of the view that the proper order to make in circumstance is to grant the said order of interlocutory injunction against both the plaintiff/respondent and the defendant/applicant, their agents workmen, or representative from forceful entry, trespass/tampering with the piece or plot of land described as Block 1, of God s own Estate located in plot No. 45 WumbaDistrict Apo Abuja, pending the determination of the substantive suit before the Honourable court. It is also further ordered that this suit be given an accelerated hearing that is to put an end to the dispute between the parties and the Honourable court so hold Signed Judge
IN 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 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 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 informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA --------------------------------------------------------------------------- S.C Appeal No.19/2011 S.C. (HC) CA LA No.261/10 WP/HCCA/Kalutara
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 informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF BELIZE A.D. 2011
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BELIZE A.D. 2011 Claim No: 386 ( NINA SOMKHISHVILI Claimant/Respondent ( BETWEEN ( AND ( ( NIGG, CHRISTINGER & PARTNER Defendants/Applicants (YOSIF SHALOLASHVILI ( PALOR COMPANY
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 informationIN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF JUDICATURE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GHANA ACCRA-AD 2016
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF JUDICATURE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GHANA ACCRA-AD 2016 BETWEEN Suit No: 1. ABU RAMADAN H/NO. 27 4 TH ABEKA KWAME STREET ABEKA-LAPAZ, ACCRA 2. EVANS NIMAKO H/NO. AP174 APLAKU-ISRAEL
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 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 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 information(2017) LPELR-43361(CA)
MUHAMMED GONI COLLEGE OF LEGAL & ISLAMIC STUDIES & ANOR v. ALI & ORS CITATION: ADAMU JAURO In the Court of Appeal In the Jos Judicial Division Holden at Jos ON TUESDAY, 11TH JULY, 2017 Suit No: CA/J/121M/2016(R)
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 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 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 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 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 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 informationSAINT LUCIA. IN THE HICH COURT OF JUSTICE (CIVIl) A.D Between: JUDCEMENT. Mr Kenneth Monplaisir, OC for the Plaintiff
... "i.,; ~ SAINT LUCIA IN THE HICH COURT OF JUSTICE (CIVIl) A.D. 1997 SUIT NO: 722 OF 1996 Between: CONCRETE AND AGGREGATES LTD PLAINTIFF AND DAMAR ENTERPRISES LTD AND DEFENDANT C. O. WILLIAMS CONSTRUCTION
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 informationTOPIC 13 CIVIL REMEDIES. LTC Harms Japan 2017
TOPIC 13 CIVIL REMEDIES LTC Harms Japan 2017 SOURCES INTERNATIONAL: TRIPS NATIONAL Statute law: Copyright Act Trade Marks Act Patents Act Procedural law CIVIL REMEDIES Injunctions Interim injunctions Anton
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 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 informationPROCEDURE & PRINCIPLES: ORDER 26A: ORDER 14 & ORDER 14A
PROCEDURE & PRINCIPLES: ORDER 26A: ORDER 14 & ORDER 14A ISBN 983-41166-7-5 Author: Nasser Hamid Binding: Softcover/Extent: 650 pp Publication Price: MYR 220.00 The law is stated as of July 1, 2004 Chapter
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. Between NIXON CALLENDER JILLIAN BEDEAU-CALLENDER AND THE PUBLIC SERVICE ASSOCIATION OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO AND
THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO Claim No. 2013-01906 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Between NIXON CALLENDER JILLIAN BEDEAU-CALLENDER Claimants AND THE PUBLIC SERVICE ASSOCIATION OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO
More informationii) The respondent did not furnish a Bank Guarantee for the amount of Rs crores and also did not pay the service tax payable on the said amount
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Civil Appeal Nos.... of 2009 (Arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 11964-11965 of 2009) Decided On: 06.08.2009 ECE Industries Limited Vs. S.P. Real Estate Developers P. Ltd. and Anr.
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA SC (CHC) Appeal No. 13/2010 Phoenix Ventures Limited No.409, 3 rd Floor H.C. (Civil) 47/2009 MR Galle Road Colombo 03 Plaintiff Vs
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 Supreme Court of Nigeria On Friday, the 14 th Day of January 2011
In The Supreme Court of Nigeria On Friday, the 14 th Day of January 2011 Before Their Lordships Aloma Mariam Mukhtar Justice, Supreme Court Walter Samuel Nkanu Onnoghen Justice, Supreme Court Francis Fedode
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 informationTrade Marks Ordinance (New Version),
Trade Marks Ordinance (New Version), 5732 1972 (of May 15, 1972) * TABLE OF CONTENTS Articles Chapter I: Chapter II: Chapter III: Chapter IV: Chapter V: Chapter VI: Interpretation Definitions... 1 Applicability
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE (CIVIL) A.D RENEE FRANCIS MARIE FRANCIS. and KENNETH JAMES LUCIA JAMES. 1994: November 30; December 7.
SAINT LUCIA IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE (CIVIL) A.D. 1994 Suit No. 586 of 1994 BETWEEN: RENEE FRANCIS MARIE FRANCIS and Petitioners KENNETH JAMES LUCIA JAMES Respondents APPEARANCES: Mr. C. Landers for
More informationIN THE EAST AFRICAN COURT OF JUSTICE AT ARUSHA FIRST INSTANCE DIVISION APPLICATION NO. 5 OF 2013 VENANT MASENGE...APPLICANT VERSUS
IN THE EAST AFRICAN COURT OF JUSTICE AT ARUSHA FIRST INSTANCE DIVISION (Coram: Isaac Lenaola, DPJ, Faustin Ntezilyayo, J, Monica K. Mugenyi J.) APPLICATION NO. 5 OF 2013 (Arising from Reference No. 9 of
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 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 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7843 OF 2009 CHAIRMAN, BOARD OF TRUSTEE, APPELLANT(s) SRI RAM MANDIR JAGTIAL KARIMNAGAR DISTRICT, A.P VERSUS S. RAJYALAXMI
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 EAST AFRICAN COURT OF JUSTICE AT ARUSHA-1 ST INSTANCE DIVISION
IN THE EAST AFRICAN COURT OF JUSTICE AT ARUSHA-1 ST INSTANCE DIVISION (Coram: Johnston Busingye, P.J; Mary Stella Arach-Amoko, DPJ; John Mkwawa, J) APPLICATION NO. 6 OF 2011 [Arising from Reference No.
More informationPROFESSOR ALBERT FOLORUNSHO OGUNSOLA V. ALHAJI MOHAMMED ABIODUN USMAN (For himself and other members of the Executive Committee of Kwara State branch
PROFESSOR ALBERT FOLORUNSHO OGUNSOLA V. ALHAJI MOHAMMED ABIODUN USMAN (For himself and other members of the Executive Committee of Kwara State branch of AH Peoples Party (APP)) COURT OF APPEAL (ILORIN
More informationTORTS SPECIFIC TORTS NEGLIGENCE
TORTS A tort is a private civil wrong. It is prosecuted by the individual or entity that was wronged against the wrongdoer. One aim of tort law is to provide compensation for injuries. The goal of the
More informationJohnson Maina Stephen & 26 others v Unity Housing Co-operative Society [2017] eklr REPUBLIC OF KENYA
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE CO-OPERATIVE TRIBUNAL AT NAIROBI CASE NO. 550 OF 2012 JOHNSON MAINA STEPHEN & 26 OTHERS CLAIMANT VERSUS UNITY HOUSING CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY RESPONDENT RULING 1. This is a ruling
More information(2018) LPELR-45396(CA)
FRSC & ORS v. MOHAMMED CITATION: In the Court of Appeal In the Jos Judicial Division Holden at Jos ON THURSDAY, 3RD MAY, 2018 Suit No: CA/J/269M/2012(R) UCHECHUKWU ONYEMENAM Before Their Lordships: HABEEB
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 information(EASTERN CAPE PORT ELIZABETH) CASE NO.: 812/2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA (EASTERN CAPE PORT ELIZABETH) CASE NO.: 812/2012 In the matter between: CLIMAX CONCRETE PRODUCTS CC t/a CLIMAX CONCRETE PRODUCTS CC Registration Number CK 1985/014313/23
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO OF 2009 JHARKHAND STATE HOUSING BOARD APPELLANT
NON REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 8241 OF 2009 JHARKHAND STATE HOUSING BOARD APPELLANT VERSUS DIDAR SINGH & ANR. RESPONDENTS N.V. RAMANA, J. JUDGMENT
More informationEXTRACTS FROM CASES ON MAREVA INJUNCTIONS ALSO KNOW AS ANTI-DISSIPATIONS ORDERS
EXTRACTS FROM CASES ON MAREVA INJUNCTIONS ALSO KNOW AS ANTI-DISSIPATIONS ORDERS We are often asked whether a client can obtain an Order from the High Court to prevent a debtor from selling or disposing
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 150 OF 2017 (ARISING OUT OF SLP (CIVIL) NO.
1 Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 150 OF 2017 (ARISING OUT OF SLP (CIVIL) NO. 35464 OF 2013) Behram Tejani & Ors..Appellants Versus Azeem Jagani.
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 informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA. M/s Raptakos, Brett & Co. Ltd... Appellant(s) J U D G M E N T. 1) The above appeal has been filed against the judgment
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1464 OF 2008 M/s Raptakos, Brett & Co. Ltd.... Appellant(s) Versus M/s Ganesh Property... Respondent(s) J U D G M
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE PORT OF SPAIN. Between. And WYCLIFFE HACKETT DALTON HACKETT BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MADAM JUSTICE M.
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO CV No. 2016-00393 Civil Appeal No. T040/2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE PORT OF SPAIN Between EARLIN AGARD Claimant And WYCLIFFE HACKETT DALTON HACKETT WENDY BAIRD Defendants
More informationFEDERAL HIGH COURT ACT. 2. Appointment of Judges.
FEDERAL HIGH COURT ACT Arrangement of Sections Part I The Constitution of the Federal High Court 1. Establishment of the Federal High Court. 2. Appointment of Judges. 3. Tenure of office of Judges. 4.
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA NORTH WEST DIVISION, MAHIKENG
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA NORTH WEST DIVISION, MAHIKENG CASE NO: 2080/2009 In the matter between:- P SMIT Applicant and CHRISNA VENTER Respondent DATE OF HEARING : 30 JANUARY 2014 DATE OF JUDGMENT
More information(2018) LPELR-45103(CA)
BASHIR v. FRN CITATION: In the Court of Appeal In the Kaduna Judicial Division Holden at Kaduna ON FRIDAY, 22ND JUNE, 2018 Suit No: CA/K/453/2017 Before Their Lordships: UZO IFEYINWA NDUKWE-ANYANWU MOHAMMED
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI (CORAM: GITHINJI, SICHALE & KANTAI, JJ. A CIVIL APPLICATION NO. NAI 97 OF 2016 (UR 76/2016)
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI (CORAM: GITHINJI, SICHALE & KANTAI, JJ. A CIVIL APPLICATION NO. NAI 97 OF 2016 (UR 76/2016) BETWEEN SATROSE AYUMA... 1 ST APPLICANT JOSEPH SHIKANGA....2 ND APPLICANT JOSEPH
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 SC APPEAL No. 199/12 SC.HC.CALA No. 178/2012 WP/HCCA/MT/31/2011/LA DC Nugegoda No. 284/2010/L In the matter of an application for
More informationIN THE EAST AFRICAN COURT OF JUSTICE AT ARUSHA FIRST INSTANCE DIVISION. (Coram: Johnston Busingye, PJ, John Mkwawa, J, Isaac Lenaola, J.
IN THE EAST AFRICAN COURT OF JUSTICE AT ARUSHA FIRST INSTANCE DIVISION (Coram: Johnston Busingye, PJ, John Mkwawa, J, Isaac Lenaola, J.) APPLICATION NO. 1 OF 2013 (ARISING FROM APPLICATION NO. 12 OF 2012)
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 informationCOURT OF APPEAL RULES 2009
COURT OF APPEAL RULES 2009 Court of Appeal Rules 2009 Arrangement of Rules COURT OF APPEAL RULES 2009 Arrangement of Rules Rule PART I - PRELIMINARY 7 1 Citation and commencement... 7 2 Interpretation....
More informationJudgment Sheet IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI. Suit No. 812 of 2001
Judgment Sheet IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI Suit No. 812 of 2001 Present : Mr. Justice Nadeem Akhtar Date of hearing : 27.11.2012. Plaintiff : International Brands (Pvt.) Limited, through Mr.
More informationCORAM: PWAMANG, J.S.C. SITTING AS A SINGLE JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF JUDICATURE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUSTICE ACCRA, GHANA.AD. 2016 CORAM: PWAMANG, J.S.C. SITTING AS A SINGLE JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT CIVIL MOTION NO. J8/90/2016 17 TH NOVEMBER
More information* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Judgment delivered on: 4 th August, I.A. No.16571/2012 & I.A. No.16572/2012 in CS (OS) 2527/2009
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: 4 th August, 2015 + I.A. No.16571/2012 & I.A. No.16572/2012 in CS (OS) 2527/2009 VEENA KUMARI Through... Plaintiff Mr.D.S. Vohra, Adv.
More informationTHE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL SOUTHERN ZONE, CHENNAI. M.A. No. 35 of 2013(SZ) in Appeal No. 31 of 2012
THE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL SOUTHERN ZONE, CHENNAI Wednesday, the 6 th day of February 2013 M.A. No. 35 of 2013(SZ) in Appeal No. 31 of 2012 Quorum: 1. Hon ble Justice Shri M. Chockalingam (Judicial Member)
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 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPEAL NO.3777 OF 2018 [Arising out of SLP (C) No of 2014]
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.3777 OF 2018 [Arising out of SLP (C) No.13256 of 2014] Sucha Singh Sodhi (D) Thr. LRs... Appellant(s) Versus Baldev
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF MALAWI MZUZU DISTRICT REGISTRY Miscellaneous Civil Application No. 47 of 2014
JUDICIARY IN THE HIGH COURT OF MALAWI MZUZU DISTRICT REGISTRY Miscellaneous Civil Application No. 47 of 2014 BISHOP KAYIRA BWANAISSA KAPONDA KARONGA (ON HIS OWN BEHALF AND ON BEHALF OF AFRICAN NYASALAND
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 informationTRADE MARKS TRADE MARKS
[CH.322 1 TRADE MARKS CHAPTER 322 TRADE MARKS ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS SECTION 1. Short title. PART I REGISTRATION OF TRADE MARKS 2. Interpretation. 3. Register of trade 4. Trust not to be entered on register.
More informationTHE SUPREME COURT DETERMINATION THE GOVERNOR AND COMPANY OF THE BANK OF IRELAND AND TOM KAVANAGH PLAINTIFFS/RESPONDENTS AND
THE SUPREME COURT DETERMINATION Between THE GOVERNOR AND COMPANY OF THE BANK OF IRELAND AND TOM KAVANAGH PLAINTIFFS/RESPONDENTS AND BRIAN O DONNELL AND MARY PATRICIA O DONNELL DEFENDANTS/APPELLANTS Neutral
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. CS (OS) No of Versus CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR O R D E R
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CS (OS) No. 2206 of 2012 KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS ELECTRONICS N.V.... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Sudhir Chandra, Senior Advocate with Mr. Pravin Anand, Ms. Vaishali Mittal,
More informationAlthough simplistic views of jurisprudence may be an invitation to error, an insight into Equity can be obtained be remembering that:
Equity: Summary Lecture Notes G C Lindsay SC, Revised July 1999, 20 September 2007 An Introduction to Equity Historical analyses of the role of the Lord Chancellor and the interaction between Equity and
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-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 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 informationIN THE NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL COURT OF NIGERIA
IN THE NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL COURT OF NIGERIA ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL BETWEEN: ST. KITTS NEVIS ANGUILLA NATIONAL BANK LIMITED. and CARIBBEAN 6/49 LIMITED
SAINT CHRISTOPHER AND NEVIS CIVIL APPEAL NO.6 OF 2002 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL BETWEEN: ST. KITTS NEVIS ANGUILLA NATIONAL BANK LIMITED and CARIBBEAN 6/49 LIMITED Appellant Respondent Before: The Hon. Mr.
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF BELIZE, A.D (BRENT C. MISKUSKI SECOND DEFENDANT (DELIA MISKUSKI THIRD DEFENDANT JUDGMENT
1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BELIZE, A.D. 2007 CLAIM NO. 186 OF 2007 BETWEEN (JOHN DIAZ CLAIMANT ( ( AND ( (IVO TZANKOV FIRST DEFENDANT (BRENT C. MISKUSKI SECOND DEFENDANT (DELIA MISKUSKI THIRD DEFENDANT
More informationCONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA MINISTER OF HEALTH AND OTHERS TREATMENT ACTION CAMPAIGN AND OTHERS JUDGMENT
CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA Case CCT 9/02 MINISTER OF HEALTH AND OTHERS Appellants versus TREATMENT ACTION CAMPAIGN AND OTHERS Respondents Heard on : 3 April 2002 Decided on : 4 April 2002 Reasons
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM RUPIANA TUNGU 3 OTHERS APPELLANTS VERSUS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM RUPIANA TUNGU 3 OTHERS APPELLANTS VERSUS Date of Last Order:08/05/2008 Date of Judgment: 27/05/2008 According to the memorandum of appeal filed in this court
More informationIN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) WP(C) 1140/2015 & WP(C) 2945/2015. Sri Vidyut Bikash Bora
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) WP(C) 1140/2015 & WP(C) 2945/2015 Sri Vidyut Bikash Bora -Vs-...Petitioner M/s. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. SUBJECT : Delhi Land Revenue Act REVIEW PETITIONS 205, 209/2007
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : Delhi Land Revenue Act REVIEW PETITIONS 205, 209/2007 IN WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No. 3361 of 2007 and CM Nos. 8175/07, 8081/07, 8082/07, 13297/07 Reserved
More informationDate of last Order. Date of Ruling
Date of last Order Date of Ruling TIMA HAJI through the services of K. MWITTAWAISSAKA ADVOCATE,has made an application by Chamber Summons under the Civil Procedure Code 1966 seeking from this court, the
More informationKARL FEIGNER Plaintiff/Respondent
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA KWAZULU NATAL, DURBAN CASE: 438/2010 In the matter between: KARL FEIGNER Plaintiff/Respondent vs THE BODY CORPORATE First Defendant/Applicant OF THE LIGHTHOUSE MALL JUDGMENT
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 information$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(COMM) 64/2018 & I.A. 927/2015. Versus GRASIM ELECTRICALS AND. Through Ex parte
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(COMM) 64/2018 & I.A. 927/2015 GRASIM INDUSTRIES LIMITED... Plaintiff Through: Mr.Ajay Sahni with Ms.Kritika Sahni, Advocates. Versus GRASIM ELECTRICALS
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 26 TH DAY OF AUGUST 2014 BEFORE: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 26 TH DAY OF AUGUST 2014 BEFORE: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY BETWEEN: WRIT PETITION No.13520 OF 2012 (GM-CPC) Smt. Narayanamma,
More informationIN THE EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA (CIVIL)
IN THE EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA (CIVIL) CLAIM NO: ANUHCV 1997/0115 BETWEEN: LOUISE MARTIN (as widow and executrix of The Estate of Alexis Martin,
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE. Between. And
REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE Claim No. CV 2012-00877 Between BABY SOOKRAM (as Representative of the estate of Sonnyboy Sookram, pursuant to the order of Mr. Justice Mon
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE EDO STATE OF NIGERIA IN THE BENIN JUDICIAL DIVISION HOLDEN AT BENIN CITY. Plaintiff/Respondent
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE EDO STATE OF NIGERIA IN THE BENIN JUDICIAL DIVISION HOLDEN AT BENIN CITY BETWEEN: MR. AB Plaintiff/Respondent SUIT NO: B/XXX AND 1. CORPORAL CD 2. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, EDO
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 informationGOVERNMENT GAZETTE REPUBLIC OF NAMIBIA
GOVERNMENT GAZETTE OF THE REPUBLIC OF NAMIBIA N$15.20 WINDHOEK - 7 November 2014 No. 5608 CONTENTS Page GOVERNMENT NOTICES No. 227 Amendment of Rules of High Court of Namibia: High Court Act, 1990... 1
More informationA MATERIAL ON ALTERNATIVE DISPUTES RESOLUTIONS AND CIVIL PROCEDURE GENERALLY
IME UMANAH CHAMBERS LAW IME UMANAH CHAMBERS A.K.A. TRAILBLAZERS INN OF COURT FACULTY OF LAW, UNIVERSITY OF UYO, UYO NIGERIA. LEGAL STUDIES RESEARCH PAPER SERIES RESEARCH PAPER 2015 January, 2015 A MATERIAL
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF THE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY HOLDEN AT JABI - ABUJA THIS TUESDAY, THE 4 TH DAY OF JUNE, 2013
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:
More information(2018) LPELR-44129(CA)
RAKUMI v. BAYAWA CITATION: HUSSEIN MUKHTAR In the Court of Appeal In the Sokoto Judicial Division Holden at Sokoto ON WEDNESDAY, 28TH MARCH, 2018 Suit No: CA/S/117S/2013 MUHAMMED LAWAL SHUAIBU FREDERICK
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA (DARE S SALAAM MAIN REGISTRY) AT DAR ES SALAAM MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 36 OF
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA (DARE S SALAAM MAIN REGISTRY) AT DAR ES SALAAM MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 36 OF 2008 1. WINSTON MABAGARA 2. NYANGINDU MARTINE 3. MOFEST AUGUSTINE APPLICANTS 4. GEORGE
More informationIN THE SOUTH GAUTENG HIGH COURT, JOHANNESBURG (REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA)
IN THE SOUTH GAUTENG HIGH COURT, JOHANNESBURG (REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA) CASE NO: 03/03539 DATE:26/10/2011 In the matter between: TECMED (PTY) LIMITED MILFORD, MICHAEL VOI HARRY BEGERE, WERNER HURWITZ,
More informationCritical Analysis of Law of Temporary Injunction
Critical Analysis of Law of Temporary Injunction Background Dr. Rajesh Kumar Law of bail and law of injunctions are two most popular and commonly used concepts in the lower courts. While bail secure the
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL WRIT JURISDICTION I.A NO OF 2012 WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. OF 2012 ASSAM SANMILITA MAHASANGHA & ORS
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL WRIT JURISDICTION I.A NO OF 2012 IN WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. OF 2012 IN THE MATTER OF: ASSAM SANMILITA MAHASANGHA & ORS PETITIONERS VERSUS UNION OF INDIA &
More informationIN THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE COURT OF APPEAL BETWEEN MAY JOSEPHINE HUMPHREY AND
IN THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO IN THE COURT OF APPEAL Civil Appeal No. 198 of 2011 BETWEEN MAY JOSEPHINE HUMPHREY Appellant AND TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO NATIONAL PETROLEUM MARKETING COMPANY LIMITED
More informationMOLEFI THOABALA INCORPORATED
FREE STATE HIGH COURT, BLOEMFONTEIN REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA In the matter between:- Case No.: 2289/2013 MOLEFI THOABALA INCORPORATED Applicant and MANGAUNG METROPOLITAN First Respondent MUNICIPALITY THE
More informationNATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI. Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 788 of 2018
NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI (Arising out of Order dated 10 th October, 2018 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Kolkata Bench, Kolkata, in C.P.
More information