JIMI ODUBA VS C.V. SCHEEPV AARTONDERNEMING HAUTMANGRACHT & ANOR - Legalpedia | The Complete Lawyer - Research | Productivity | Health

JIMI ODUBA VS C.V. SCHEEPV AARTONDERNEMING HAUTMANGRACHT & ANOR

FRANKLIN BRAIDE VS THE STATE
July 3, 2025
HIS HIGHNESS ISAAC BOYI UMUKORO & ORS VS NIGERIAN PORTS AUTHORITY & ANOR
July 3, 2025
FRANKLIN BRAIDE VS THE STATE
July 3, 2025
HIS HIGHNESS ISAAC BOYI UMUKORO & ORS VS NIGERIAN PORTS AUTHORITY & ANOR
July 3, 2025
Show all

JIMI ODUBA VS C.V. SCHEEPV AARTONDERNEMING HAUTMANGRACHT & ANOR

Legalpedia Citation: (1997) Legalpedia (SC) 10131

In the Supreme Court of Nigeria

HOLDEN AT ABUJA

Thu May 15, 1997

Suit Number: SC.141/1994

CORAM


ITA GEORGE MBABA JCA

A.I. IGUH


PARTIES


JIMI ODUBA APPELLANTS


C.V. SCHEEPV AARTONDERNEMING HOUTMANGRACHTC.V. SCHEEPV ARRTIBCERNMENT RAAMGRACHT RESPONDENTS


AREA(S) OF LAW



SUMMARY OF FACTS

SUMMARY OF FACTS
The defendant’s case, is that pursuant to professional services rendered, he forwarded a number of bills of charges to the plaintiffs . The plaintiffs settled two of these bills, he asserted that upon failure to meet the outstanding sums he commenced an action against the plaintiffs in the Federal High Court for the recovery of the amount with interest. The issue that has led to this appeal is in relation to the payment of security for costs ordered by the trial court against the plaintiffs/respondents at the instance of the defendant/appellant.


HELD


Appeal dismissed.


ISSUES


Was the Court of Appeal entitled to interfere with the decision of the trial Court for the reasons given by the court having regard to the evidence and the issues properly arising for determination before it.”


RATIONES DECIDENDI


SECURITY OF COST


The principle that has guided the Courts when considering an application for security for costs is that the courts have a discretion to order security for costs.


SECURITY OF COST


The power to order a foreign plaintiff to give security for costs is entirely discretionary. It is no longer an inflexible or rigid rule that a plaintiff resident abroad should be ordered to provide security for costs. Security for costs cannot now be ordered as of course by the Courts from a foreign plaintiff unless the Court is satisfied that it is proper and just to order such security.


CASES CITED


Republic of Costa Rica r. Erlanger (1876) 3 Ch. D 62.|Aeronave S.P.A. v. Westland Charters Ltd. (1971) 1 WLR (1445), (1971) 3 All ER 531.|Sir Lindsay Parkinson & Cu. Ltd. v. Triplan Ltd. (1973) 2 All ER 273 at 285-286|Chelleu v.Bioun (1923) 2 K.B. 844 CA|Crozat v. Brogden (1894) 2 QB 30 at 35|Aeronave SPA & Anor v. Westland Charters Ltd. & Ors. (1971) 3 All ER 531 at 533,|


STATUTES REFERRED TO


High Court of Lagos (Civil Procedure) Rules, 1972|


CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT

Comments are closed.