CHIEF S.O. AGBAREH & ANOR V DR. ANTHONY MIMRA & ORS - Legalpedia | The Complete Lawyer - Research | Productivity | Health

CHIEF S.O. AGBAREH & ANOR V DR. ANTHONY MIMRA & ORS

HON. ROTIMI CHUBUIKE AMAECHI VS INEC & 2 ORS
May 30, 2025
THE REGISTERED TRUSTEES OF NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF COMMUNITY HEALTH V PRACTITIONERS OF NIGERIA
May 30, 2025
HON. ROTIMI CHUBUIKE AMAECHI VS INEC & 2 ORS
May 30, 2025
THE REGISTERED TRUSTEES OF NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF COMMUNITY HEALTH V PRACTITIONERS OF NIGERIA
May 30, 2025
Show all

CHIEF S.O. AGBAREH & ANOR V DR. ANTHONY MIMRA & ORS

Legalpedia Citation: (2008) Legalpedia (SC) 02587

In the Supreme Court of Nigeria

Fri Jan 11, 2008

Suit Number: SC. 216/2006

CORAM


ALI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

*SHEHU USMAN MOHAMMED [He died in a motor accident on Tuesday 9th February 1993 before the judgement

COKER, CHIEF JUSTICE, NIGERIA


PARTIES


1. CHIEF S.O. AGBAREH2. TOSIL HOLDINGS LTD APPELLANTS


RESPONDENTS


AREA(S) OF LAW



SUMMARY OF FACTS

The 2nd Appellant, took out a suit against the Respondents, but agreed to settle the matter amicably out of court, terms were reached and entered as judgment. In default by the Respondents, the Appellant filed an application for Attachment and/or Garnishee which was granted. An appeal and motion for stay of execution at the Appeal Court which was granted led to this present appeal.


HELD


Appeal allowed. Cross-appeal dismissed


ISSUES


Whether having regards to the Agreement dated 30/11/92 and 1/12/92 between the 2nd Appellant and the 2nd Respondent under which various payments have been made relating to the Traffic Light project and realizing that the two said agreements were the pivot in the Consent Judgment of 1/11/96 between the parties, the Court of Appeal was right in isolating clause 4 of the consent judgment for decision on the ground that the word “Current” therein referred only to the       2nd payment embodied in the said Consent Judgment and that the 2nd Appellant was not entitled to the payment of 35% of N71,169,943.32 being the 3rd C.K payment for the installation of Traffic Lights at Abuja even though Parry Osayande and Parry Blue Chips had been paid by the 2nd Respondent out of the 3rd C.V. payment.


RATIONES DECIDENDI


APPEAL


An Appellate Court can prefer an issue or issues formulated by any of the parties and can, itself and on its own, formulate an issue or issues which in its considered view, is/are germane to and is or are pertinent in the determination of the matter in controversy. Per F.I Ogbuagu JSC


CASES CITED


1. Sabiba v. Yassin (2002) 2 SCNJ. 14 at 242. Ezemba v. Ibeneme & Anor. (2004) 7 SCNJ 136 at 155-156.3. Alhaji Are & Anor. v. Ipaye & Anor. (1986) 3 NWLR (Pt.29) 416 at 418 C.A


STATUTES REFERRED TO


Evidence Act


CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT 

Comments are closed.