SURVEYOR B. J. AKPAN V AKWA IBOM PROPERTY & INVESTMENTS COMPANY LTD

CORAM

SIR UDO UDOMA JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

WALTER SAMUEL NKANU ONNOGHEN JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

MUHAMMED SAIFULLAH MUNTAKA COOMASSIE JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

PARTIES

SURVEYOR B. J. AKPAN (Carrying on business under the name & Style of Benchmark Surveys & Engineering Company) APPELLANTS

AKWA IBOM PROPERTY & INVESTMENTS COMPANY LTD

RESPONDENTS 

AREA(S) OF LAW

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The plaintiff/ Appellant institute this action against the Defendant/Respondent under the undefended list claiming from the Respondent for payment of contract sum which is contained on the contract of agreement. The trial court found in favor of the Appellant and ask the respondent to pay the contract sum. The Respondent being dissatisfied with the judgment of the trial court appeal to the Court of Appeal and the Court of Appeal set aside the decision of the trial court. Again the Appellant being dissatisfied with the decision of the Court of Appeal, appeal to the Supreme Court.

HELD

APPEAL DISMISSED

ISSUES

“1. Whether the Court of Appeal was right in holding that the plaintiff/appellant’s claim before the trial court was not “a liquidated money demand” going by the affidavit and documentary evidence put forward by the appellant and so ought not to have been heard under the undefended list?

2. Whether the holding of the Court of Appeal at page 189 lines 21 – 26 that the trial High Court was not under a duty to forage into the file to see if the documentary evidence in support of the application to place the case on the undefended list makes the order was in conflict with the Court’s eventual finding that the claim of the appellant was not a liquidated money demand and if so whether this was fatal to the decision?

RATIONES DECIDENDI

UNDEFENDED LIST PROCEDURE-PURPOSE OF

“However this procedure is not designed to shut out a defendant who can show in is affidavit in support intention to defend or any other means, that indeed there is a triable issue”. PER OLUKAYODE ARIWOOLA

UNDEFENDED LIST PROCEDURE-WHETHER PARTIES CAN CONFER JURISDICTION ON COURT OVER UNLIQUIDATED MONEY DEMAND

“Parties cannot on their own agree to confer on the court jurisdiction over an undefended list of an unliquidated money demand”. PER SULEIMAN GALADIMA, JSC

SUMMARY JUDGMENT-MEANING AND NATURE OF

“Summary judgment therefore is a judgment granted on a claimed or defence about which there is no genuine issue of material fact and upon which the movant is entitled to prevail as a matter of law. For this type of judgment the court will only consider the contents of the pleadings, the motions and additional evidence adduced, such as documents produced as Exhibits, by the parties rather than one of law. This procedural device allows speedy disposition of a controversy without the need for trial”. PER OLUKAYODE ARIWOOLA

UNDEFENDED LIST PROCEDURE-CONDITION PRECEDENT FOR PLACING A SUIT ON THE UNDEFENDED LIST

“One of the conditions precedent to placing a matter on the undefended list is that the plaintiffs claim must be liquidated or be based on ascertainable debt.”-PER SULEIMAN GALADIMA, JSC

UNDEFENDED LIST PROCEDURE-PUPOSE OF

“The purpose of the procedure under the undefended list as opposed to General Cause List is to enable the plaintiff, initiating the action, obtain summary judgment without resort to trial where the case is patently clear and unassailable.”PER OLUKAYODE ARIWOOLA

CASES CITED

National bank of Nig. Ltd. V. Weide & co. (1996) 4 SCNJ 147M.u. Gombe v. Pw Nigeria Ltd & ors. (1995) 7 SCNJ 19Harles Eyoke v. Nwankwesix 16 SCNJ 87Johnny v. Edoja (2007) ALL FWLR (pt 365) 527  Nortex Nig. Ltd. V Frametools co. Ltd. (1997) Pt. 501) 603Ya’u v. City Security Ltd. (2003) FWLR (Pt. 501) 603 Effanga v. Rogers (2003) FWLR (pt. 157, 1058 Shodipo v. Leminkanen &Ors(1986)NWLR (Pt.15) 220Nkwo Market Community Bank (Nig.) Ltd vs. Obi   (2010)14 NWLR (Pt.1213)169 SC

STATUTES REFERRED TO

NONE?

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT