PATRICK IZUAGBE OKOLO V. UNION BANK OF NIGERIA LIMITED
June 13, 2025ABAINTA OKENDU UBANI VS. THE STATE
June 13, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (2003) Legalpedia (CA) 12111
In the Court of Appeal
Mon Dec 29, 2003
Suit Number: CA/L/133/96
CORAM
PIUS OLAYIWOLA ADEREMI JUSTICE, COURT OF APPEAL
BIOBELE ABRAHAM GEORGEWILL
PARTIES
FEDERAL MORTGAGE BANK OF NIGERIA LIMITED APPELLANTS
1. DESIRE GALLERY LIMITED 2. CHIEF FELIX IWEREBON RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The Plaintiffs/Respondents initiated garnishee proceedings against the Appellants in two suits – ID/1808/93 and 1809/93 claiming the sum of N4, 000,000.00 with 15% interest and N2,545,600.00k with 15% interest. The trial Court granted a mareva injunction on the Garnishee/Appellant restraining it from removing the judgment/debtor’s money in its custody. The Plaintiffs/Respondents commenced garnishee proceedings to enforce the judgments given in their favour and an order nisi was decreed against the Appellants. The Garnishee/Appellant filed an application praying the trial Court to discharge the garnishee order nisi on the ground that the judgment/debtors’ money was dissipated to satisfy the other judgments on the orders of the Courts of co-ordinate jurisdiction. Given the fact that the said mareva Ex parte injunction was made by the trial Court prior to the subsequent orders of the Courts of co-ordinate jurisdictions, the trial Court made the garnishee order nisi absolute. Aggrieved by the ruling of the trial Court, the Garnishee/Appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal praying the Court to set aside the garnishee order absolute made by the trial Court as same was made without affording the Garnishee/Appellant fair hearing.
HELD
Appeal Dismissed
ISSUES
Whether in the circumstances of this case the learned trial judge was right to make the garnishee orders absolute
RATIONES DECIDENDI
CAUSE OF ACTION-DEFINITION OF- DISTINCTION BETWEEN A CAUSE OF ACTION AND A RIGHT OF ACTION
“Thus a cause of action may be defined also as a claim in a court of law or reason for seeking a review in a court of law, which reason, may be for a wrong denied or right denied. Thus, the reason to seek such a redress in a court of law may arise, but the right may not be immediately exercised. In consequence, the right to a cause of action denotes the existence of a right provided under the ground norm or the Constitution or the ordinary law of this country as well as the residual ability to exercise the right to seek a redress for the injury suffered in a court of law as provided by the law. Thus the distinction between the two phrases – a cause of action and a right to sue, is simply that the right may accrue, but it may not be immediately enforced”. PER OKUNOLA, JCA
ACTION-APPLICABLE LAW THERETO
“It is trite that the applicable law in an action is that which is in operation when the cause of action arose”. PER ADEKEYE JCA
JURISDICTION OF COURT- WHEN CHALLENGED-DUTY OF COURT
“Once the jurisdiction of a competent court of record is challenged, it must be resolved first before taking any other step”. PER ADEKEYE JCA
CAUSE OF ACTION-DEFINITION OF
Cause of action had been judiciously defined by the Supreme Court in Alhaji W. Akibu & Ors. v. Alhaji M. Oduntan & Ors. (2000) 13 NWLR (Pt. 685) 446;(2000) 7 S.C (Pt. 11) 106; (2000) 7 SCNJ 189, as the fact or facts, which gives a person a right to judicial relief. In other words, the entire set of circumstances giving rise to an enforceable claim. PER OKUNOLA, JCA
CASES CITED
Egbe v Onogun (1972) All NLR (Pt 1)95Ogbonna v N.U.R.T.W. (1990() 3 NWLR (Pt 141)696 at 703Ojukwu v Governor of Lagos State (1986)3 NWLR (Pt 26)39;
STATUTES REFERRED TO
Lagos State High Court rules 1997 Sheriffs and Civil Process Act Cap 407 Laws of the Federation 1990.
