MOBIL PRODUCING NIGERIA LTD VS LAGOS STATE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY & ORS
June 18, 2025NATHAN ONWUKA & ANOR VS BEN MADUKA & ORS
June 18, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (2002) Legalpedia (SC) 81316
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria
Fri Oct 4, 2002
Suit Number: SC. 156/1999
CORAM
SALIHU MODIBBO ALFA BELGORE, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
AKINTOLA OLUFEMI EJIWUNMI , JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
1. JONASON TRIANGLES LTD.2. JONATHAN A. ANAGOR APPELLANTS
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The proceedings were adjourned severally at the instance of the appellant and the trial court finally heard the matter in their absence and granted the respondent’s claim.
HELD
The court dismissed the appeal and held that there was no breach of fair hearing.
ISSUES
1. Whether the appellants’ right to a fair hearing of the substantive suit at the trial had been breached or substantially eroded and whether the concurrent decision to the contrary has occasioned serious miscarriage of justice in the circumstances.2. Whether the purported hearing and determination of the substantive suit was competent and whether the concurrent decision affirming same has occasioned serious miscarriage of justice.3. Whether the lower court is justified in striking out Notice of Appeal filed on 26th November 1995 and in failing to determine the issues Number 1A and 2A arising from the Amended Notice of Appeal on 9th September 1997.”
RATIONES DECIDENDI
CONCURRENT FINDINGS OF FACTS OF LOWER COURTS WILL NOT BE SET ASIDE EXCEPT WHERE IT IS PERVERSE
Where the concurrent findings of the two Courts are unimpeachable, and no special circumstances have been shown to the effect that the findings are impeachable, this Court would not interfere with them- Ejiwunmi J.S.C
DUTY OF COURT TO FACILITATE HEARING OF MATTERS PENDING BEFORE IT.
The duty of a Judge to see that everything is done to facilitate the hearing of an action pending before him. In so doing, he has to exercise his discretionary power, which undoubtedly belongs to the trial judge. The exercise of this discretionary power to facilitate the hearing of the action pending before him may however be challenged on appeal. But it is settled principle that a Court of Appeal ought to be very slow indeed to interfere with the discretion of a trial judge- – Ejiwunmi J.S.C.
CASES CITED
Obimiami Bricks & Stones (Nig.) Ltd. vs. African Continental Bank Limited (1992) 3 N.W.L.R. (pt. 229) 260 at page 293U.A.C. Nig. Ltd. v. Fasheyitan (1998) 11 N.W.L.R. (pt. 573) 179;Sanusi v. Ameyogun (1992) 4 N.W.L.R. (pt. 237) 527;Chinwendu v. Mbamali (1980) 3-4 S.C. 31;Woluchem v. Gudi (1981) 5 S.C. 291.
STATUTES REFERRED TO
NONE
