CORAM

---

KARIBI-WHYTE

RIDWAN MAIWADA ABDULLAHI JCA

OBANDE FESTUS OGBUINYA JUSTICE, COURT OF APPEAL

---

PARTIES

---

MESSRS. NV SCHEEP APPELLANTS

---

M.V.S.ARAZ RESPONDENTS

---

AREA(S) OF LAW

---

---

SUMMARY OF FACTS

“Plaintiff as Agents to Messers N.V. Scheep Vaatmij Unidor Willie Mstad of Curacoe, Claim against the defendants jointly and severally the sum US$1250,000 (United States Dollars Three Hundred Thousand Only) (sic) as security for damages interest and cost relating to a claim for demurrage and/or damages for detention for the 2nd Defendants use of hire of the said M.V. CINDYA pursuant to a charter party dated 17th October, 1989, which claim is presently before arbitration in London, united Kingdom.”

---

HELD

---

That the Federal High Court has no jurisdiction to entertain Plaintiffs’ action and the Court of Appeal was right in so holding

---

ISSUES

---

Whether the admiralty jurisdiction of the Federal High Court can be invoke solely for the purpose of obtaining security for damages, interest and costs that may be awarded in arbitration proceedings being conducted in a foreign country.

---

RATIONES DECIDENDI

---

MEANING OF SECURITY FOR DAMAGES

---

Security for damages is usually required of a debtor or defendant to assure the payment or performance of his debt by furnishing the creditor or plaintiff with a resource to be used in case of failure in the principal obligation.

---

ISSUES FOR DETERMINATION MUST BE DISTILLED FORM GROUNDS OF APPEAL

---

It is a well-established principle that issues for determination in the appeal can only be formulated from the grounds of appeal against the judgment. Accordingly, any issue formulated not supported by any ground of appeal is invalid and cannot be countenanced in the determination of the appeal. –

---

JURISDICTION-HOW DETERMINED

---

It is a well settled principle of the institution of proceedings that jurisdiction of the court is determined by the cause of action of the plaintiff as endorsed on the writ of summons –

---

DEFINITION OF CAUSE OF ACTION

---

It is not a cause of action that can ground a claim, unless otherwise specifically provided by statute the exercise of the jurisdiction inevitably involves the right to hear and determine the case on its merits. This means that there must be a lis and a cause of action. A cause of action is a factual basis or some factual situation a combination of which makes the matter in litigation an enforceable right of actionable wrong.-

---

JURISDICTION TO BE SETTLED FIRST WHEN RAISED

---

Whenever the issue of competence and/or jurisdiction is raised before a court it has invariably been considered both imperative and appropriate first to settle the question. The way the issue is settled will determine whether the court can proceed to hear the matter before it. –

---

CASES CITED

---

1. Adeyemi v. Opeyori (1976) 9-10 S.C. 31|2. Idika & Ors v. Erisi & Ors (1988) 2 (Pt. 78) NWLR 563|3. General Oil Ltd. v. Chieg Ogunyade (1997) 4 NWLR (Pt. 501) 613|4. Shitta-Bey v. A-G Federation (1998) 10 NWLR (Pt. 570) 392|5. Bello & Ors. v A.G. Oyo State (1986) 5 NWLR (Pt. 45) 828

---

STATUTES REFERRED TO

---

Not Available|

---

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT