PIUS ADAKA VS CHRISTOPHER ANEKWE - Legalpedia | The Complete Lawyer - Research | Productivity | Health

PIUS ADAKA VS CHRISTOPHER ANEKWE

JOSEPH SALIBA V. RODA YASSIN
June 20, 2025
SALISU YAHAYA V. THE STATE
June 20, 2025
JOSEPH SALIBA V. RODA YASSIN
June 20, 2025
SALISU YAHAYA V. THE STATE
June 20, 2025
Show all

PIUS ADAKA VS CHRISTOPHER ANEKWE

Legalpedia Citation: (2002) Legalpedia (SC) 22111

In the Supreme Court of Nigeria

HOLDEN AT ABUJA

Thu Feb 7, 2002

Suit Number: SC.56/1997

CORAM


A.I. IGUH

O. ACHIKE JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

STANLEY SHENKO ALAGOA – JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

OLAJIDE OLATAWURA., JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT


PARTIES


PIUS ADAKA ONWUMERE OSU JONATHAN UKEJE ANENE ONONUJU (For themselves and on behalf of the people of EMEHABA Family of Umuopia Akokwa) ALOYSIUS NGAWUCHIGABRIEL CHUKWU PETER NWOSU PETER ASOGWO EMMANUEL AKABOGU REGINA NWOSU DAVID UME UME UKEJE UBA UZZOGHERE CLEMENT UKACHI ALOYSIUS NNAGBORO EVARIST AKOGHERE DOMINIC OSUIGWE OGBUKAGU MBAKWESILAS UKEJE ALPHONSUS OSUEKE NNANNA USUEKE FABIAN ONWUACHU (ALIAS “ACHARA”) FIDELIS UKACHICHUKWUMA OKEKE APPELLANTS


CHRISTOPHER ANEKWEEMMANULL EZEALASAMUEL ONUOHA (Substituted for Richard Agodi and Benjamin Onyekanma) By order of the Court of Appeal On 3/5/95. (For themselves and on behalf of the people of Umudike, Uzii) RESPONDENTS


AREA(S) OF LAW



SUMMARY OF FACTS

The appellants filed a preliminary objection to the committal application filed by the respondents for alleged disobedience to a restraining injunction on the ground that the order was not a mandatory injunction. The lower courts dismissed the application.


HELD


The court allowed the appeal and struck out the committal application.


ISSUES


1. Whether the Court of Appeal was right in holding that the Supreme Court had by its decision in Osayande Uhunwangbo v. P.I. Okojie & another (1989) 5 NWLR (Part 126) 276 changed the law as to the enforcement of mandatory and restrictive injunctions and in failing to apply the said decisions to the present matter so as to hold that foreign rules of court were not applicable to this matter? 2. Whether the Court of Appeal was right in holding that Order 42 Rule 7 of the rules of Supreme Court of England 1956 was applicable to the application for committal before the trial court in this matter by virtue of Section 16 of the High Court Law of Eastern Nigeria, 1963, and in ordering the remittal of the application for committal to the trial court of hearing on the merits under the said Foreign court rules’.


RATIONES DECIDENDI


CASES CITED


Uhunmwangbo v. Okojie & Anr. (1989) 5 NWLR (pt. 122) 471|Hart v. Hart (1990)1 NWLR (pt 126) 276


STATUTES REFERRED TO


NONE|


CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT

Comments are closed.