BOOTHIA MARITIME INC. V FAREAST MERCANTILE CO. LTD. - Legalpedia | The Complete Lawyer - Research | Productivity | Health

BOOTHIA MARITIME INC. V FAREAST MERCANTILE CO. LTD.

DONGTOE V. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, PLATEAU STATE
June 24, 2025
NARINDEX TRUST V NIGERIAN INTER-CONTINTENTAL MERCHANT BANK LIMITED
June 24, 2025
DONGTOE V. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, PLATEAU STATE
June 24, 2025
NARINDEX TRUST V NIGERIAN INTER-CONTINTENTAL MERCHANT BANK LIMITED
June 24, 2025
Show all

BOOTHIA MARITIME INC. V FAREAST MERCANTILE CO. LTD.

Legalpedia Citation: (2001) Legalpedia (SC) 08167

In the Supreme Court of Nigeria

Fri Apr 20, 2001

Suit Number: SC. 90/99.

CORAM


S.M.A. BELGORE

OKAY ACHIKE, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

SAMSON ODEMWINGIE UWAIFO, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT.


PARTIES


1. BOOTHIA MARITIME INC.2. GLOBAL TRANSPORTE OCEANICO S. A. INC.3. NIGERIAN PORTS AUTHORITY. APPELLANTS


RESPONDENTS


AREA(S) OF LAW



SUMMARY OF FACTS

The respondent was a consignee and endorsee of a bill of lading of a consignment of 66 pallets of uncoated Bond Paper carried on board the defendants’ vessel. Upon the goods reaching the port here in Nigeria, the plaintiff handed the bill of lading to an agent to help clear the goods from the port. It was however found out upon transfer of the consignment by the defendant that the consignment was less 12 pallets. The Plaintiff sued the defendants for Special and general damages for loss/non -delivery of the 12 pellets. Rather than filing a statement of defence, the defendant filed a motion under the demurer procedure under Order 27 of the Federal high court civil procedure Rules challenging inter alia the locus standi of the plaintiff, having endorsed the bill of lading to an agent to clear its goods for it.


HELD


The Court In dismissing the appeal held that an affidavit is not required to be filed in support of a demurrer application under order 27 of the Federal High court Civil procedure Rules, 1976. The only document the court is obliged by rules to look at is the plaintiff’s statement of claim and no more.


ISSUES


1. Whether an affidavit is mandatorily required in support of a demurrer application under Order 27 of the Federal High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 1976 (supra), and did the non-filing of such an affidavit by the Appellants herein preclude the trial and Lower Courts from looking at the document (Bill of Lading) pleaded by the respondent in their Statement of Claim in the determination of the demurrer application?.2.  Whether Order 33 of the Federal High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules aforesaid (particularly Rules 4 & 20 thereof) is applicable to demurrer applications brought under Order 27 of the Federal High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules (supra) so as to require the filing of a Supporting affidavit by the Appellant and whether failure to file such an affidavit is an incurable fundamental defect?3. Whether the Appellant in the demurrer proceedings needed to have established by evidence the passing of property other than rely on the contents of the Statement of Claim and/or the document (Bill of Lading) pleaded by the Respondent therein??


RATIONES DECIDENDI


CASES CITED


1. Brawal Shipping (Nigeria) Limited v. F J. Onwadike Co. Limited & Anor (2000) 6 S.C. (Pt. II) 133 (2000) 11 NWLR (Pt. 678) 387.2. B.G.C.C. v. C.M.I.S. (1962) 2 ANLR 563, 572.3. Lawal v. G.B.O (1972) A.N.L.R. 217, 218 .4. Seatrade v. Fiogret (1987-1990) 3 N.S.C.C. 453.5. Day vs. William Hill (Park Lane) Ltd. (1949) 1 All ER 219,221


STATUTES REFERRED TO


None


CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT 

Comments are closed.