Legalpedia Citation: (2016- 12) Legalpedia (CA) 12971

In the Court of Appeal

Wed Dec 21, 2016

Suit Number: CA/L/642M/2011

CORAM



PARTIES


N.D.I.C. (CENTURY MERCHANT BANK LTD) APPELLANTS


THOR LIMITEDJOSEPH RAAD RESPONDENTS


AREA(S) OF LAW



SUMMARY OF FACTS

The Appellant filed an originating process at the Federal High court against the Respondents as Defendant in the Federal High Court. At the trial, the court raised the issue suo muto  that the originating process was signed by the secretary other than the legal practitioner in violation of the provision of Section 24 of Legal Practitioners Act 1975 and thereby called for address of parties on the issue. Following this, the Plaintiff/Respondent filed a motion to amend all the processes including the Originating process for the sole reason that the procedure at the Failed Bank Tribunal was to indicate the name of Applicant. The Respondent’s counsel filed a Counter Affidavit, that the processes were defective that it should have been signed in the name of a legal practitioner and therefore offends the Legal Practitioners Act, 1975. The Appellant’s counsel contended that the process was signed by NDIC in accordance or compliance with Section 11 of Failed Bank (Recovery Debts) and Financial Malpractices in Bank Decree Act No. 18 of 1994, since it was the Act that regulated the procedure for filing matters at the Failed Banks Tribunal at the time the suit was instituted in 1997. After due consideration of the arguments of both parties the court entered judgment in the favour of the Respondent and found the process defective. Dissatisfied with the ruling of the trial court, the Appellant have appealed to this Court.


HELD


Appeal Allowed


ISSUES


?    Whether the dismissal of the suit was wrongful for erroneously declaring the Originating Process incompetent as being in non-compliance with the Legal Practitioners Act, 1975 without considering the applicable provision of the failed Banks (Recovery of Debts) and financial malpractices in Banks Decree (Act) No: 18 of 1994 and Tribunal Certain Consequential Amendment etc decree No: 62 of 1999?


RATIONES DECIDENDI


CASES CITED



STATUTES REFERRED TO


Failed Banks (Recovery of Debts) and Financial malpractices in Banks Decree (Act) No: 18 of 1994Legal Practitioners Act 1975Tribunal Certain Consequential Amendment etc decree No: 62 of 1999


CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT


legaladmin

Recent Posts

RENCO NIGERIA LIMITED V Q OIL & GAS SERVICES LIMITED & ANOR

Legalpedia Citation: (2025-08) Legalpedia 42685 (CA) In the Court of Appeal PORT HARCORT Mon Aug…

6 months ago

ENGINEERING ENTERPRISE OF NIGER CONTRACTOR CO. OF NIGERIA VS THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF KADUNA STATE

Legalpedia Citation: Legalpedia SC KIZW In the Supreme Court of Nigeria Thu Sep 11, 2025…

6 months ago

COMMISSONER OF POLICE, WESTERN REGION VS ALOYSIUS IGWE & 2 ORS

Legalpedia Citation: (1960-01) Legalpedia 19912 (SC) In the Supreme Court of Nigeria Holden at Lagos…

6 months ago

CLEMENT AKRAN VS INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE

Legalpedia Citation: (1960-02) Legalpedia 45350 (SC) In the Supreme Court of Nigeria HOLDEN AT LAGOS…

6 months ago

J. A. IREM VS OBUBRA DISTRICT COUNCIL AND OTHERS

Legalpedia Citation: (1960-03) Legalpedia 03348 (SC) In the Supreme Court of Nigeria HOLDEN AT LAGOS…

6 months ago

JOHN KHALIL KHAWAM AND CO VS K CHELLARAM AND SONS (NIGERIA)

Legalpedia Citation: (1960-03) Legalpedia 49115 (SC) In the Supreme Court of Nigeria HOLDEN AT LAGOS…

6 months ago