CHIEF OROK I. IRONBAR VS FEDERAL MORTGAGE FINANCE.
May 30, 2025GABRIEL ATIVIE V KABEL METAL NIG. LIMITED
May 30, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (2008-05) Legalpedia (SC) 32111
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria
Fri May 23, 2008
Suit Number: SC. 39/2001
CORAM
GEORGE ADESOLA OGUNTADE, JUSTICE ,SUPREME COURT
GEORGE ADESOLA OGUNTADE, JUSTICE ,SUPREME COURT
GEORGE ADESOLA OGUNTADE, JUSTICE ,SUPREME COURT
KUMAI BAYANG AKAAHS JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
GEORGE ADESOLA OGUNTADE, JUSTICE ,SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
1. DOMINIC E. NTIERO APPELLANTS
NIGERIAN PORTS AUTHORITY
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The Appellant commenced this action against the Respondent challenging his dismissal. The Respondent responded with a preliminary objection contending that pre- action notice was not served on it which was overruled. They court ruled in the Appellant’s favour. A successful appeal at the Appeal Court led to this present appeal.
HELD
Appeal dismissed. The Apex Court held that non-compliance with the requirement of a pre-action notice renders the action incompetent.
ISSUES
1. Whether the provisions of sections 97 (2) and 98 of the Ports Act are valid and constitutional?
2. If so whether sections 97(2) and 98 Ports Act were properly applied to the case of the appellant (founded on a contract of service) and whether (or not that is the case whether) the Court of Appeal was right that non-compliance with the said provisions deprived the trial court of jurisdiction?
RATIONES DECIDENDI
CASES CITED
Madukolu v. Nkemdilim (1962) 2 SCNLR 341.
STATUTES REFERRED TO
Ports Act (Cap. 361 Laws of the Federation 1990)
