Nigeria National Shipping Lines v Abdul Ahmed (MISC APP 4 of 1990) [1990] SLCA 2 (20 June 1990)

: he. aA nS oe esos apps A/90 ”

: 2° phase cor op spPaay. op. smmuna LeoNR a conan Hon, Ne, Justice Me 0, Tajw-Doon,J+ie ~ Proaiding Hon. Mr. Justice A, B, Timbo, JeA. Hons te, Justice Os Hy Alghell, J.ke Bene: NIGERIA NATIONAL SHIPPING LINES ~ APPLICANTS/DEPENDANTS a0 ABDUL AHMED (TRADING AS ABDUL AZIZ ENTERPRISES) = RESPONDENT/ PLAINTIFF Mies Yasmin Jusu-Sheriff for Applicants/Defendants. ‘Aa J. Biahop Gooding Bsq-, for Reapondent/Plaintiff. ROUDNG DELIVERED 2om-DAY OP JUNE, 1990 ‘PAJU-DEBI,J,A.t- This is an application by way of Motion dated 45th March, 1990 brought on behalf of the Defendant/Applioant for the following Orders:

4. That the Defendant/Applioant be granted’ on extension of time to seek leave to appeal to the Supremo Court . ageinst the ruling and oxdor of the Court of Appoot ie dated 29th January, 19905

2. A Btay of Proceeding in the Iligh Court notion: C.C. 806/85 1985 N. No, 28 Nignrian National Shipping lines Vox foaud Ammo av arended to xeads ‘ i Add Mood Pending ao bd Aelz Matorpeives snd Nigertan National Shipping Lines,

3. Stay of Preccedings in the Action herein mnsioned ending the doterainetion of tho propnand appint, Lf th * tire¥ Cilio srught be exited Ae Purthar or othor roliof

ot 35 4 one Ea 3 | Mao appliontion Ls oupported by the affidavit of Taha Lona Dyfan’ svoin 16 on the 15th March, 1990 and filed herein, Thoze 4s ~-an at flasvit in opposition by AnivtI-Bishop Gooding sworn to on $ the 28th of Maxch, 1990 and filed hexein, | There is an affidavit in anaver to the affidavit in opposition avorn to on 5th April, 1990 by Yasmin Jus “horifty The application for on oxtonsion of tine to seek leavo in made purmiant to Rule 69 of the Court of Appeal Rules P.N. 29 of

Tho Dofendante/ applicants roly on the entize affidavit of Isha * Tonle Dyfan, : ‘The stops leading #0 thio application are briefly as follevet~ A Writ of Summons dated 10th Deoomber, 1985 was Lesued for service against the Defendante/pplicants herein, vho are out of the Jurisdiction. An interlocutory Judgenont in default of appearance waa entered against the Defendanta/Applicants on 18th February, 1986. On the 2%et Apr{l, 1986 tho Dofondante/ Applicants entered appearance under protest to the Notico of Writ of Summons and filed Notices dated 21et April, 1986 and 29th May, 1986 seeking to set aside the Judgement in default and leave to defend the ection, On the 16th June, 1906 Mr. Justices M.

0. Adophy (aa ho thon was) refused the Defondanto' application to sot astdo the eata Jadgonont 4n default of appearance and for leave to defond, ha ‘The Hon, Mr. Justice M.0. Adophy the Judgo presiding over tho assessment proceedings in the Aotion 0.0. 606/05 had proceeded with tho dotoraination of the ald action horetn delivered Jude 7 mont in tho matter on the 4th day of July, 1909. On the 25th July, 1906, tho Tefendantr/ Applicants filed a Notice in tho Court of Appon soon: lowe Lo apponl mgatnat Justice M.0. Adophy's Order of 11th July, 1986.

i ogee *: : 3b : 08 #85 18th Hovonbor, 1966 tho Court of Appoal dlamtened tho agpadaseton tor loave to appeal, Sn the 17th Doconber, 1906 tho Defondante/ Applicants £1204 — ‘a Motién sooleing leave from tho Court of Appeal to apponl to the Sigmund Court against the Oder of 10th November, 1906. “5 On the 50th March, 1987, tho Court of Appeal refused the Defendshts/ Applicants leave to appeal to the Supreme Court, ‘The Applicants sought special loave to appeal from the Supreme Céust Which wad granted on tho 18th February, 1988, i hs appeal was f1lod and subsequently argued before the Suproue court consisting Hon. the Chiof Justice Mee Justice S.tGP. Kutuba, Preeiding, Saprohe Court Justioos, Hasding, AvoonorRennex and Ware} ant Hon. Hr, Justioe E.CyThompeoh-Davin, Justice of Appons 2) “Gq tte tiem of retmamy, 1989 the wal Hoiourable Siprose “Genre ina mejortty Jadgnent dtomiseda the Dofendanta' appeal. (on tho 9th day of Novonbex, 1969 the Defendanta/ Applioante Sted a Notion of Motion in the Court of Appeal for tho folloving peters

(2) Mat the spplteanto/Dofondants de granted an oxtonsion of tine wit in whtoh to appeal agninst the Judgment ‘of the High Court mado the 4th day of July, 1969 whhoh Judgment and all proosodings were stayed by an sxdox of the Supcono Oourt dated 19th July, 1909 until ‘Tuesday 7th Novyenber, 1989. (44) fusthor or other roltof. " (on the Tth Doconber, 1909 thio matter tise. App. 50/09 ~ Nigerian Yational Shipping Janos Vo. Abdul Mined enne before ua 7 for hearing. (om tho 29th day of Jamxy, 1990, the Court ruled na follows:

EN S47 + Having considered the various argunonts and eubaiseions ; ‘of both counsol in this oase, I have come to the inovitablo : ‘consiiicn that the préLininany objedtion of Gounsol for the Reayorident 4s upheld, ‘The application, io dtoniased with 7 costs." Te do against this background that tho Dofendante/Applicants en the 15th day of March, 1990 filed @ Notice of Motion in tho Court ‘of Appeal for tho Ontexs rrayed for before this Court, Vilye Yeonin JumSnorif? gava tho following reasona for filing ‘thts appliontion other for loare ox oxtonaton of tina, The Judgment vas not nado avetlable until sonotise in Fobmus-y and she direoted Court's attontion to paragraphs 7 and 0 of Mas Pyfan'p affidavit and peragraph 5 of the affidavit in. apposition, Ske opined that the appliontion for leave for extention of tine is nado-gn further geeand ast tha Defendants 4111 deoize to appeal. ‘to the Court of Appeal on the Judgment of the High Court of 4th Jaly, 1999, There 19 guffioiont good cause for an oxtension of ‘time pureusnt to Rule 69(1i). . That the delay in extension of time te not very protracted, that hor submtesion would be in tho intero~* of juation, 4f an oxtenbion of tno 42 granted to viich t3 sook wave from th Court of Appeal to the Supreme Court on an Lasus of pone public inpartence and of matemtel aigificance to the Dafondante/ Applicants. Sho submitted that tho second Limb of hor appliontion 1s quostion of stay, . The application for a stay at this stage Lo in fact and ta roality an application for a atay of ezsoution of the Judgment of 4th of July, In connidoning tho wv . quostion of whether or not te grant a atay, tho Court in oxoreiso af Ata undoubted discretion my talo into account and, to tmrttod Yo place weight on tho fact that thio Judguent was obtained in 2 default ant not nt the close of a trial on tho morte

The pages read for this report end here. The judgment continues in the PDF.