CORAM
SLYVESTER UMARU ONU, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
SLYVESTER UMARU ONU, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
SLYVESTER UMARU ONU, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
SLYVESTER UMARU ONU, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
WITT & BUSCH LIMITED APPELLANTS
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The application for the registration of the foreign judgment brought by the respondent was granted with an order to the appellant to apply within 14days to set aside the registration. The appellant failed to apply within the said time but their application which was heard by another judge was granted. The Court of Appeal reversed the grant.
HELD
Appeal dismissed. The Supreme Court held that the Court of Appeal was right in holding that the registration of the foreign judgment from England is governed by the Reciprocal Enforcement of Judgment Ordinances CAP 175 LFN 1958.
ISSUES
1. Whether the Court of Appeal was right in holding that registration of the Respondent’s judgment from the High Court of England was governed by the Reciprocal Enforcement of Judgment Ordinances CAP 175 LFN 1958 as against the Foreign Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act CAP 152 LFN 1990.2. Whether the decision of the Court of Appeal is not liable to be set aside for reason that the English Court Judgment was registered in foreign currency and not Nigerian Naira contrary to the provisions of Section 4(3) of the 1990 Act.3. Whether the Court of Appeal is correct in holding that by participating in the proceedings before the English High Court the Appellant lost its right to challenge the subject matter jurisdiction of the English Court
RATIONES DECIDENDI
CASES CITED
1. Broadline Enterprises Ltd. v. Montery Maritime Corporation(1995) 9 NWLR (Pt. 417) 12. Amanabu v. Okafor(1966) 1 ANLR 205
STATUTES REFERRED TO
1. Reciprocal Enforcement of Judgment Ordinances CAP 175 LFN 1958
2. Foreign Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act CAP 152 LFN 1990.