May 27, 2025
Legalpedia Citation: (2009) Legalpedia (SC) 11118 In the Supreme Court of Nigeria Fri Jun 5, 2009 Suit Number: SC.178/2008 CORAM PARTIES NIGERIA NATIONAL PETROLEUM CORPORATION APPELLANTS RESPONDENTS AREA(S) […]
CORAM
PARTIES
NIGERIA NATIONAL PETROLEUM CORPORATION APPELLANTS
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The 1st respondent was unhappy with the 2nd respondent’s acquisition of 50% interest in Oil Mining Lease. The 1st respondent filed originating motion to question the extent of their constitutional powers. The trial judge dismissed the suit. Dissatisfied the 1 respondent appealed to the Court of Appeal which set aside the trial court’s decision and made some orders in favour of the 1st respondent. The 2nd respondent has appealed the decision and filed a stay of execution
HELD
Application for stay of execution is dismissed
ISSUES
NONE
RATIONES DECIDENDI
PRINCIPLE GOVERNING GRANT OF STAY OF EXECUTION
A well known principle of law governing the application of a stay of execution is that the applicant must disclose exceptional or special circumstances to warrant the grant. Per MUKHTAR, JSC
WHEN A JUDGMENT CREDITOR WILL BE DENIED THE FRUITS
A judgment creditor is entitled to have the benefits of the fruits of his judgment. And so, a Court of Appeal should not grant a stay of execution unless there are special or strong circumstances for doing so. Per FABIYI JSC
CASES CITED
1. Vaswani Trading Co. v. Savalakh & Co. (1972) AII NLR 922 at 9262. University of Lagos v. Aigoro (1985) 1 SC. 265, 271; 3. University of Lagos v. Olaniyan (1985) 1 SC. 2594. Okafor v. Nnaife (1987) Vol. /8 NSCC 1195?
STATUTES REFERRED TO
None.