Just Decided Cases

CAPTAIN E. C. C. AMADI VS NIGERIAN NATIONAL PETROLEUM CORPORATION

Legalpedia Citation: (2000-06) Legalpedia 59325 (SC)

In the Supreme Court of Nigeria

Holden at Lagos

Fri Jun 2, 2000

Suit Number: SC 144/1997

CORAM


M.L. UWAIS, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT

U. MOHAMMED, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT

A.I. KATSINA-ALU, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT

A.O. EJIWUNMI, JUSTICCE SUPREME COURT


PARTIES


CAPTAIN E. C. C. AMADI

APPELLANTS 


NIGERIAN NATIONAL PETROLEUM CORPORATION

RESPONDENTS 


AREA(S) OF LAW


ACTION – PRE- ACTION NOTICE- INTERPRETATION OF LAW

 

 


SUMMARY OF FACTS

The appellant’s action against the respondent for wrongful dismissal from employment was struck because his counsel did not include his place of abode in the pre- action notice.

 

 


HELD


The court allowed the appeal.

 

 


ISSUES


Whether or not Exhibit ‘B’ (i.e. letter of demand from Appellant’s Solicitors) is a valid notice within the meaning and intendment of the N.N.P.C. Act, 1977.

Even if Exhibit ‘B’ is not a valid notice (which is denied), whether or not such privileges as conferred by section 11 (2) of the N.N.P.C. Act, 1977 extend to suits of breach of contracts of employment such as in the instant case.

Whether or not the Respondents knew or could have known the Appellant’s place of abode as at the time of Exhibit ‘B’.”

 

 


RATIONES DECIDENDI


THE PARTICULARS TO BE INCLUDED IN PRE- ACTION NOTICE UNDER SECTION 11(2) OF THE NNPC ACT, 1977 IS DIRECTORY


While issuance of the notice by a prospective plaintiff is mandatory, the particulars to be included in the notice, which are – cause of action, particulars of claim, name and place of abode of the intending plaintiff and the relief to be claimed – appear to me to be directory – Uwais J.S.C.

 

 


OMISSION TO STATE THE HOME ADDRESS OF THE PLAINTIFF IN A PRE ACTION NOTICE CANNOT DEPRIVE THE PLAINTIFF HIS CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT OF ACCESS TO COURT


non-compliance with Section 11(2) of the NNPC Act, 1977 by the mere omission to state the home address of the Plaintiff is not sufficiently substantial to deprive the Plaintiff his constitutional right of access to the Court under section 31 and the courts of the exercise of their jurisdiction under section 6(6)(b) of the Constitution 1979- Karibi- Whyte J.S.C

 

 


CASES CITED


Katsina Local Authority v. Makudawa (1971) 1 NMLR.100 at 105-6,

Umukoro v. NPA (1997) 4 NWLR.656

 

 


STATUTES REFERRED TO


The 1979 Constitution

 

 


CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT

Esther ORIAH

Recent Posts

TIMOTHY AONDOAKAA V. EMMANUEL AJO & ORS

Legalpedia Citation: (1999) Legalpedia (CA) 19214 In the Court of Appeal Tue Mar 23, 1999…

1 hour ago

CHIEF ASABA EMIRI & ORS VS CHIEF DOMINIC IMIEYEH & ANOR

Legalpedia Citation: (1999-04) Legalpedia 94653 (SC) In the Supreme Court of Nigeria Holden at Lagos…

1 hour ago

PELE OGUNYE VS THE STATE

Legalpedia Citation: (1999) Legalpedia (SC) 58119 In the Supreme Court of Nigeria Fri Apr 23,…

2 hours ago

AWA OKORIE UCHENDU & ORS VS CHIEF EYO OGBONI & ORS

Legalpedia Citation: (1999) Legalpedia (SC) 13111 In the Supreme Court of Nigeria Fri Apr 23,…

2 hours ago

GODWIN I. OKEKE & ORS VS MADAM EBI ORUH

Legalpedia Citation: (1999) Legalpedia (SC) 13111 In the Supreme Court of Nigeria Fri Apr 30,…

2 hours ago

DR E.J. ESENOWO VS DR I. UKPONG & ANOR

Legalpedia Citation: (1999) Legalpedia (SC) 37176 In the Supreme Court of Nigeria Fri Apr 30,…

2 hours ago