PRINCE (DR) B. A. ONAFOWOKAN V. WEMA BANK PLC

CORAM

PARTIES

1. PRINCE (DR.) B. A. ONAFOWOKAN 2. MR. A. 0. ONAFOWOKAN 3. MRS. V. A. ONAFOWOKAN APPELLANTS

RESPONDENTS

AREA(S) OF LAW

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The 2nd respondent obtained facilities from the 1st respondent, in addition, a Trust Deed was created. The 2nd respondent defaulted in repaying the credit facilities; as a result of which, a trustee was appointed so the respondent went to court. On being served with the writ of summons and the statement of claim, the defendants without filing a statement of defence, filed a preliminary objection contending that the court lacked jurisdiction. The trial court upheld the preliminary objection of the defendants. On appeal, the Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, set aside the ruling of the trial court and remitted the case to the trial court for hearing on the merit

HELD

Appeal dismissed

ISSUES

None. ?

RATIONES DECIDENDI

GROUNDS APPEALED AGAINST MUST CHALLENGE THE RATIO DECIDENDI

“The law is trite that a ground of appeal must be against a decision being appealed against and should constitute a challenge to the ratio of the decision.” PER MOHAMMED JSC

WHEN ISSUE OF JURISDICTION MAY BE RAISED

“An application to dismiss an action on grounds of law may attack the jurisdiction of the Court simpliciter or raise the issue that the Plaintiff has not made out on the writ of summons and statement of claim a cause of action.” PER MOHAMMED JSC

CASES CITED

M.B.N. Plc. v.Nwobodo (2005) 14 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 945)Ayanboye v. Balogun (1990) 5 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 151) 392?

STATUTES REFERRED TO

Companies and Allied Matters Act

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGEMNT