TIAMIYU ADEWOLE V JOSEPH POPOOLA DADA
June 17, 2025CHIEF THOMAS OKPALA V M. U. OKPU & ORS
June 17, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (2003) Legalpedia (SC) 31311
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria
Fri Jan 31, 2003
Suit Number: SC. 64/1997
CORAM
M. L. UWAIS CHIEF, JUSTICE, NIGERIA
M. E. OGUNDARE, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
S. U. ONU, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
A. I. KASTINA-ALU, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
A. O. EJIWUNMI, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
GENERAL YAKUBU GOWON APPELLANTS
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The Plaintiffs claim that the Defendant is the father of the 2nd Plaintiff, Musa Gowon.
HELD
Appeal dismissed.
ISSUES
1. Whether the Court of Appeal was right in holding that the learned trial judge was not in error in refusing the application for extension of time within which to file an amended counter-claim on the ground that the cause of action occurred to the defendant after he had filed his statement of defence.2. Whether on the facts of this case, the original suit and the counter-claim can be tried together.?
RATIONES DECIDENDI
CAN A CAUSE OF ACTION ACCRUING AFTER THE ISSUE OF A WRIT BE JOINED BY AMENDMENT TO THE ORIGINAL ACTION AS A COUNTER-CLAIM
“Just as the plaintiff cannot be allowed to bring into his case an entirely fresh cause of action which arose after the action had been started, a defendant will not be allowed to raise by way of an amendment to the Statement of Defence a counter-claim in respect of a cause of action that arose subsequent to the issue of the writ. I think it is good sense. To bring in such a fresh cause of action, does not, viewed from any angle, constitute an amendment. It means what it is, that is, starting a new cause of action, and one which did not accrue, and therefore could not have been sued upon, at the time the action was brought.” Katsina-Alu, JSC
CASES CITED
1. Eshelby V. Fed European Bank (1931) ALL E. R. Rep. 8402. Oyegbola V. Esso West African Inc. (1966) 1 ALL NLR 170
STATUTES REFERRED TO
None
