SOUTH ATLANTIC PETROLEUM LTD VS. THE MINISTER OF PETROLEUM RESOURCES

CORAM

PARTIES

SOUTH ATLANTIC PETROLEUM LTD APPELLANTS

THE MINISTER OF PETROLEUM RESOURCES RESPONDENTS

AREA(S) OF LAW

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The Appellant brought a motion to the Supreme Court supported by an affidavit seeking the exercise of discretion of this court for an order extending the time within which to seek leave to appeal on grounds of mix law and facts and hence to amend the Notice and grounds of appeal.

HELD

Appeal allowed

ISSUES

Whether the applicant has placed sufficient materials before this Honourable Court to enable the court exercise its discretion in its favour by granting the application Whether this Court has the power to grant the prayers sought by the applicant and if it has, whether as a matter of discretion this Court should grant the prayers sought by the appellant

RATIONES DECIDENDI

APPEALS-DIFFERENCES BETWEEN FILING AN INITIAL APPEAL AND AN AMENDED APPEAL- EFFECT OF NON-COMPLIANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE CONSTITUTION/ACT AND RULES OF COURT

“This Court, see Tsokwa Oil Marketing Co V B.O.N Ltd (2002) 11 NWLR (Pt 777) 163, has dwelt on the difference between the law governing the filing of an initial appeal and an amended appeal. The principle remains that the two are not the same. Whereas the filing of original appeal from decisions of the Court of Appeal to this Court is governed by Section 233 of the 1999 Constitution as amended and Section 27 of the Supreme Court Act, the filing of additional grounds of appeal, whether or not the grounds require leave of court is governed by the Supreme Court Rules by virtue of the combine operation of subsection 6 of Section 233 and Section 236 of the 1999 Constitution. It must be restated that the principles of law as to when to file either and the effect of non-compliance in each case differ.
While non-compliance with the Constitution and the Act is fatal, non-compliance with the rules of court has been adjudged a mere irregularity”.

RULES OF COURT-COURTS ARE BOUND BY THEIR RULES

“I remain of the firm and considered view that courts, are bound by their rules and acquit themselves only by conducting proceedings in the manner their rules stipulate they should”.

APPEALS-APPEAL FROM DECISIONS OF THE COURT OF APPEAL ON GROUNDS OF FAIR HEARING-WHETHER REQUIRES LEAVE OF COURT

“An appeal from the decisions of the Court of Appeal predicated on such a ground lie to this Court as of right requiring no leave of the court for its validity”.

CASES CITED

Sarakatu V NHDS Ltd (1981) 4 SC 26|Ogbomor V State (1985) 1 NWLR (Pt 2) 223|F.S.B International Bank Ltd V Imano Nigeria Ltd (2000) 7 SC (Pt 1) 1|Amadi V Okoli (1977) 17 SC 57

STATUTES REFERRED TO

The 1999 Constitution (as amended)|The Supreme Court Rules|The Supreme Court Act|

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT