BEST LAW REPORT SUBSCRIPTION PRICE!!

  • Julius Berger (Nig.) Plc v. Obaseki
  • 757
  • 2014-12-01
  • ₦ 200
  • Buy Now

Julius Berger (Nig.) Plc v. Obaseki

JULIUS BERGER NIGERIA PLC

V

  1. MR. MIKE OBASEKI
  2. THE FEDERAL MINISTRY OF TRANSPORT

COURT OF APPEAL

( BENIN DIVISION )

SIDI DAUDA BAGE JCA ( Presided )

AYOBODE O. LOKULO-SODIPE JCA ( Read the Lead Judgment )

TOM SHAIBU YAKUBU JCA

CA/B/315/2009

FRIDAY, 28 JUNE 2013

ACTION - Properly constituted action - Essential elements of

APPEAL - Cross-appeal - What is - When can be filed

APPEAL - Respondent - Role of to defend judgment appealed against

COURT - Federal High Court - Power of to transfer a case instituted before it to a State High Court

FAIR HEARING - Breach of - Allegation of - Effect of on proceedings in which the breach has been occasioned - Orders made therein - Substitution of other orders therefor - Whether proper to ask for

FAIR HEARING - Breach of fair hearing - Allegation of - Burden of proving same - Who bears - What the allegation should be based on - Litigant resorting thereto for curing their inadequacies at the trial court - Impropriety of

LIMITATION OF ACTION - Statute-barred - When an action becomes Statute-barred action - Legal implication of

Issues:

  1. Whether the appellant was given fair hearing before the trial court granted its order to strike out the name of the 1st respondent from the suit and then, transferring the suit to the Edo State High Court.
  2. Whether the trial court was right in striking out the name of the 1st respondent from the suit, leaving the appellant as a party.
  3. Whether the trial court was right in ordering the transfer of this particular case to the Edo State High Court.

Facts:

The 1st respondent herein instituted an action before the Federal High Court, Benin Judicial Division, claiming against the appellant herein and the 2nd respondent jointly and severally, series of reliefs and damages for the illegal demolition of his properties. On 3 July 2008, counsel to the 1st respondent orally applied for the name of the 2nd respondent - Federal Ministry of Transport, to be struck out and for the case to be transferred to the Edo State High Court for proper adjudication. The trial court duly granted the orders.

Being dissatisfied, the appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal.