CORAM
A.G. KARIBI-WHYTE JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
KAWU JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
A.B WALI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
E.O. OGWUEGBU JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
S.U.MOHAMMED. JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
FIRST AFRICAN TRUST BANK
APPELLANTS
BASIL O. EZEGBU
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The Appellants challenged the orders of the Court of Appeal to reinstate all the employees of the 1st appellant that were terminated as a result of the General meeting held by them.
HELD
The Supreme Court held that the appellants were bound by the orders of the Court of Appeal and had a duty to implement them whether they were illegal or not. As long as the orders subsist and as long as the plaintiffs refuse to implement them, the court would not give them a hearing on the application in relation to the prayers objected to until such a time they purge themselves of their contempt.
ISSUES
Whether the plaintiffs are in contempt of the Court of Appeal order
RATIONES DECIDENDI
CONTEMPT UNDER COMMON LAW
“Under the Common Law which is part of the law of this country, the general rule is that a litigant who is in contempt is not allowed to take any step of his own in the action or cause in which the contempt has been committed. Per OGWUEGBU, JSC
EXCEPTION TO THE GENERAL RULE OF CONTEMPT UNDER COMMON LAW
There are however exceptions to this general rule of the common law. A party in contempt can move the court if he is contesting the regularity of the process or service by which he is in contempt. The rule does not also apply to cases in which all that the contemnor is asking is to be heard in respect of matters of defence. A person in contempt is not entitled to be heard if an order has been made in the exercise of the discretion of the court as the Court of Appeal had exercised its discretion in the case before us. Per OGWUEGBU, JSC
CASES CITED
Hadkinson v. Hadkinson (1952) CA 285
Odogwu v. Odogwu (1992)2 NWLR (Pt. 225) 539
Chuk v. Cremer (1846)1 Coop. temp. Cott. 205,
Garstin v. Garstin (1865) 4 S. W. and Tr. 73
Cavendish v. Cavendish (1866) 15 W.R. 182
Gordon v. Gordon (1904) P. 163 at 172.
STATUTES REFERRED TO