CORAM
PARTIES
EIMSKIP LIMITED APPELLANTS
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The action was originally between the respondent to this appeal, EXQUISITE INDUSTRIES (NIG) LIMITED who as plaintiff had sued the 1st and 2nd defendants, that is OWNERS OF MOTOR VESSEL BACOLINECI-3 and BRAWAL SHIPPING NIGERIA LIMITED claiming, general and special damages including cost, customs duty, clearing charges, transport and bank charges. In the course of the proceedings, the respondent applied to the trial Court, for orders Joining EIMSKIP who were the original carriers of the containers in dispute as a party to the suit. The learned trial Judge granted the prayers as prayed. On learning of the orders made for her joinder, EIMSKIP who is appellant, brought a summons to set aside the order of the trial judge, striking out or dismissing the claim. His prayers were not answered. The appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal, which in a unanimous decision, dismissed the appeal. He further appealed to the Supreme Court.
HELD
The appeal was allowed. The order of the Court of Appeal was set aside.
ISSUES
The Honorable Justices misdirected themselves when they concluded that the appellant was necessary and proper party to the action.The honorable Justices misdirected themselves when they held that the appellant who was at all times outside jurisdiction was properly served within jurisdiction by delivery of processes to one Brawal Shipping Nigeria Limited.
RATIONES DECIDENDI
CONSEQUENCES OF FAILURE TO SERVE PROCESS
“It is beyond question that failure to serve process where service of process is required goes to the root of our conceptions of the proper procedure in litigation.” Per M. E. OGUNDARE, JSC.
CASES CITED
None.
STATUTES REFERRED TO
None.