Home Developments Ltd. Vs Scancila Contracting Co. Ltd. (1994)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report

KUTIGI, JSC. 

By an originating notice of motion dated 22/10/85 and filed on 23/10/85 the appellant, Home Developments Ltd, sought for an order that –

“The award of Mr. Gabriel Aduku (hereinafter called “the Arbitrator”) dated the 29th day of August, 1985 made in the reference to arbitration before him between Home Developments Ltd (hereinafter – called “the Applicant”) and Seancila Contracting Company Limited (hereinafter called “the Respondent”) under the Arbitration clause contained in the contract Agreement signed on the 19th day of March, 1981:

(1) Be set aside, and

(2) That the High Court should invoke its powers under and by virtue of sections 6(6)(a) and (b) and 236 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1979 Order 22 Rule 9, High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 1977, to become seized of the matter and thereupon to make any awards, orders and grant any reliefs it deems fit and justice in the circumstances of this matter; or

(3) In the Alternative, that the award be remitted to another Arbitrator the Court may appoint, for reconsideration; and that the costs of and incidental to this application be paid by the said SCANSILA CONTRACTING COMPANY LIMITED.”

These prayers were immediately followed by a five-page foolscap size “grounds for the application.” The motion was also supported by an affidavit of 49 paragraphs sworn to by one Alhaji Isa Ibrahim Makarfi, Company Executive of Home Developments Ltd, the appellant.

The respondent, Scancila Contracting Co. Ltd entered a conditional appearance under protest with a notice of preliminary objection to the application on the following grounds –

“1. That the Applicant’s application dated 22nd October 1985 and filed on 23rd October 1985 for an order that the award of Mr. Gabriel Aduku- (the Arbitrator) dated the 29th day of August 1985 made in the reference to arbitration before him between the Applicant and the Respondent beset aside and or remit the award to another Arbitrator the court may appoint, for reconsideration commenced in this suit by originating Notice of Motion is incompetent and should be struck out and or dismissed by this Honourable Court:-

(i) The form and commencement of this suit is unknown to and contravene the provisions of Order 1 Rules 1, 2, and 3; Order 2 Rules 1, 2, and 3; and Order 34 Rule 8 High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 1977, made pursuant to section 116(1) High Court Law of Kaduna State.

(ii) If at all the Application aforesaid was made in pursuant of section 35 of the High Court Law Cap. 49, same contravenes the provisions of Order 8 Rules 3(1-6)

Rules of Supreme Court Practice, White Book Volume 1.

(iii) The application aforesaid was not made within fifteen days after the publication of the award aforesaid, as prescribed by the provisions of Order 22 Rule 12 of the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules 1977.

(iv) The provisions of Sections I 1 and 12 of the Arbitration Law Cap. 7 Laws of Northern Nigeria 1963, applicable in Kaduna State, are governed and or regulated by the provisions of the rules of court, viz High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules 1977, which came into operation on the 1st day of March, 1977.