CORAM

PARTIES

1)ADAMAWA STATE GOVERNMENT2)ATTORNEY GENERAL ADAMAWA STATE3)MINISTRY OF LAND & SURVEY4)MINSTRY OF AGRICULTURE APPELLANTS

1)CHIEF GODWIN OMENAKA2)YOLA NORTH LOCAL GOVERNMENT COUNCIL RESPONDENTS

AREA(S) OF LAW

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The Applicants by a Motion on Notice brought pursuant to Order 6 Rules 7 and 9 of the Court of Appeal Rules 2016 and the inherent powers of the Court prayed the Court for enlargement of time to seek leave to appeal on grounds of mixed law and facts against the judgment of the Lower Court, an order granting leave to appeal against the said judgment on grounds of mixed law and fact, and an order for extension of time to appeal against the said judgment. The grounds for the application are that the Applicants were unable to file the appeal within the statutory 90 days period as allowed by the Court of Appeal Rules, because they only became aware of the judgment delivered on 10th May 2012 sometimes in 2014, when the 1st Respondent applied to enforce the said judgment against the Applicants before High Court in Yola, that the matter was once appealed by Zenith Bank Plc vs. Chief Godwin Omenaka & Adamawa State Government before this Honourable Court on 10th November, 2015, wherein, this Honourable Court set aside the Garnishee absolute granted by the Lower Court and allowed the appeal before Court of Appeal, Yola Division, that the Applicants are appealing on grounds of mixed law and fact and being out of time, hence this application. In opposition to the grant of the application, the Respondent filed a counter affidavit of five paragraphs and four exhibits “R” “R1, “R 2” and “R4”,which are letters dated 23/9/2012, 1/8/2013, 18/1/2018 and 13/8/2018 respectively, being letters written to the Attorney-General of the state and His Excellency, the Governor of the State, requesting for the payment of the Judgment Debt which order was refused by the Government.

HELD

Application Dismissed

ISSUES

None

RATIONES DECIDENDI

EXERCISE OF JUDICIAL DISCRETION – A COURT OF LAW CANNOT EXERCISE ITS DISCRETION ON VAGUE FACTS

“In Gwaza V. Bature (2014) LPELR 41138 Page 22 Paragraphs A-D this Court per Abiru JCA Held: –
“It is trite that in an application where it is required that the reason for the delay be given as in the instant case, it is necessary to state the dates and times when the events that caused the delay took place, and this is to enable the court to determine the cogency and credibility of the reasons given. When facts, dates, time and names are alluded to but not specifically stated in the affidavit, the court is entitled to presume that no such facts actually existed and such affidavit is bereft of requisite facts necessary to support the application placed before the court a court of law cannot exercise its discretion on such vague facts”

CASES CITED

None

STATUTES REFERRED TO

Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended)|Court of Appeal Rules, 2016|

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT