- Federal Polytechnic Idah v. Onoja
- ₦ 200
Federal Polytechnic Idah v. Onoja
THE FEDERAL POLYTECHNIC IDAH
ENG. AKOH SAMUEL ONOJA
COURT OF APPEAL
( LAGOS DIVISION )
GEORGE ADESOLA OGUNTADE, JCA ( Presided )
PIUS OLAYIWOLA ADEREMI, JCA ( Read the Lead Judgment )
MITCHELL CHUKWUMAH-ENEH, JCA
1ST JULY, 2002
ACTION - Commencement of action
- By originating summons instead of writ of summons - Whether puts an
end to plaintiffâ€™s case
APPEAL - Discretion of trial court - Decision borne out of exercise of
such exercise - When appellate court may set aside
APPEAL - Judgment, ground of appeal and issue for determination - Need
for direct connection among the three
COURT - Trial court - Decision
borne out of exercise of its discretion When appellate court may set aside
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Commencement of action by originating summons
instead of writ of summons - Whether puts an end to plaintiffâ€™s case
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Originating summons - Advantage of
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Originating summons - Impropriety of
commencing action in hostile proceedings through originating summons
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Originating summons - When affidavit of
plaintiff leaves matters for conjectures -Impropriety of commencing such action
by originating summons
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Rules of court directing the commencement of
suit - Purpose of as aid to course of justice - Need not to be allowed to stand
in the way of justice
Whether the High Court of Lagos State Civil Procedure
Rules are applicable at the Federal High Court.
Whether there exists a lacuna in the Federal High Court
Civil Procedure Rules to necessitate application of the High Court of Lagos
Civil Procedure Rules vis-a-vis the
Whether the respondentâ€™s claim as formulated in the
court below falls within the nature of actions that can be commenced by way of
Whether the respondentâ€™s claim is the construction of
his contract of service with appellant vis-a-vis
compliance with statutory provision and letter of appointment and other
attached document of master and servant relationship simpliciter.
Whether the documents attached to the respondentâ€™s
summons are public documents or private documents
Whether ground 3 of the Notice of Appeal relates to any order made by the lower
court on 20th November, 1996 as alleged by the appellant.
Whether the Court of Appeal should and can inquire into
the exercise of discretionary power of the court below on matter of fact when
it has not occasioned a miscarriage of justice visa-vis transfer of suit to another judicial division.
Whether ground 2 of the additional ground of appeal
relates to any act or order of the lower court.
was plaintiff at the Federal High Court Lagos commenced this action by
originating summons while the appellant as 1st defendant together with 2nd and
3rd defendants filed an application praying the court to decline jurisdiction
to entertain the suit for reason of being incompetent for non-fulfilment of the
condition precedent for the institution of the action. Alternatively to strike
out the names of 2nd and 3rd defendants for misjoinder.
together with the 2nd and 3rd defendants filed a subsequent application seeking
an order of transfer of the suit from Lagos to Abuja or Enugu by reason of
closeness of the two divisions to the parties.
conclusion of hearing of the application, trial court refused the prayer urging
it to decline jurisdiction in the 1st application and allowed the prayer to
strike out the names of the 2nd and 3rd defendants.
On the issue
of transfer of the case to Abuja or
Enugu, the trial court refused the prayer on the ground that there is only one
Federal High Court in Nigeria and it lied in the discretionary power of the
court to transfer cases before it to another division, where the applicant had
made a good case for it.
Dissatisfied by the ruling,
appellant appealed to the Court of