KANO STATE OIL AND ALLIED PRODUCTS LTD V KOFA TRADING CO. LTD - Legalpedia | The Complete Lawyer - Research | Productivity | Health

KANO STATE OIL AND ALLIED PRODUCTS LTD V KOFA TRADING CO. LTD

YORINDE V A-G AND COMMISSIONER FOR JUSTICE OYO STATE
July 4, 2025
HON. JUSTICE T.A.A. AYORINDE VS A-G AND COMMISSIONER FOR JUSTICE OYO STATE & ORS
July 4, 2025
YORINDE V A-G AND COMMISSIONER FOR JUSTICE OYO STATE
July 4, 2025
HON. JUSTICE T.A.A. AYORINDE VS A-G AND COMMISSIONER FOR JUSTICE OYO STATE & ORS
July 4, 2025
Show all

KANO STATE OIL AND ALLIED PRODUCTS LTD V KOFA TRADING CO. LTD

Legalpedia Citation: (1996) Legalpedia (SC) 04130

In the Supreme Court of Nigeria

Tue Feb 27, 1996

Suit Number: SC.192/1989

CORAM


MUHAMMADU LAWAL UWAIS, C.J.N. (Presided), JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

MICHAEL EKUNDAYO OGUNDARE, (Read the Leading Judgment), JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

UWANI MUSA ABBA AJI


PARTIES


KANO STATE OIL AND ALLIED PRODUCTS LIMITED APPELLANTS


RESPONDENTS


AREA(S) OF LAW



SUMMARY OF FACTS

The Applicant (now Respondent) prayed the court to appoint a sole Arbitrator to decide the dispute between Kasoap and Kofa Trading Company (Nig.) Limited in respect of a contract dated 15th October 1984


HELD


Suffice it to say that this appeal succeeds and it is hereby allowed. I set aside the judgment of the court below and the ruling of the trial High Court. Having held that the Applicant/Respondent was not a party to the submission, it had no locus standi to bring its application which is, accordingly, hereby struck out. I award N1,000.00 costs to the Appellant.


ISSUES


“(1) Whether the Court of Appeal was right in holding that the Respondent could commence proceedings for the appointment of an arbitrator by the Court of trial by Motion on Notice in the circumstance of this case.(2) Whether the Respondent is a party to the submission and can rely on the provisions of the Arbitration Clause to invoke the Court’s power under Section 6 of the Arbitration Law Cap. 7 Laws of Northern Nigeria 1963 applicable to Kano State.(3) If the answer to No. 2 above is positive, whether the Court of Appeal was right in holding that the Respondent had satisfied the conditions precedent to the exercise of the powers conferred upon the court by Section 6 of the Arbitration Law.(4) Whether the Court of Appeal rightly exercised the powers conferred upon it under Section 16 of the Court of Appeal Act, having regards to the circumstances of the case, in appointing a Sole Arbitrator.”


RATIONES DECIDENDI


CASES CITED


Lahan v. Attorney-General of W.R. (1963) 2 SCNLR 47; (1963) All NLR 224 (Reprint),  Akunnia v. Attorney-General, Anambra State (1977) 5 SC 161,Fajimi v. The Speaker, Western House of Assembly (1962) 1 SCNLR 300; (1962) ANLR (Pt. 1), 206, (Reprint)


STATUTES REFERRED TO


None.


CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT

Comments are closed.