Chief Martha Udusegbe & Ors. V. Shell Petroleum Development Company Nigeria Ltd & Ors. (2007)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

SHOREMI, J.C.A.

This is an application brought by the plaintiffs/applicants for themselves as on behalf of Okerenkoko/Bibiokpre-Zion/Nkpemu Akpata/Egwal/ Asiafama Communities/Village/Fishing Camps by Chief Martha Udusegbe (suing as lawful attorney against the defendants/respondents. By a motion on notice under Orders 3 6(1), 7(2), (3) of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2002 and section 16 of the Court of Appeal Act asking for the following orders.

“1. An order extending the time within which the appellant/applicant may seek leave to appeal against the ruling of the Federal High Court, Benin Division delivered on the 5th of May, 2004 by Honourable Justice Kolawole.

2. An order granting leave to appeal against the ruling of the Federal High Court, Benin Division delivered on the 5th of May, 2004 by Honourable Justice Kolawole.

3. An order extending the time within which the applicant may appeal against the ruling of the Federal High Court, Benin Division delivered on the 5th of May, 2004 by Honourable Justice Kolawole and file the annexed proposed notice of appeal and ground of appeal (exhibits “A”) out of time.

4. Leave to appeal against the order of cost.

5. An order of this Honourable Court staying execution of the order of cost made against the plaintiffs and order suspending further hearing in the case delivered on the 5th of May, 2004.”

The application is supported by an affidavit of 25 paragraphs sworn to by the said Martha Udusegbe.

For ease of reference paragraphs 1 – 12 are reproduced hereunder.

“I Martha Udusegbe, Female, Christian, Nigerian citizen, legal practitioner of No.1 Ufuoma Close, Off Dugbo Avenue, Off Udu Road, Enerhen, Delta State, hereby make oath and state as follows: That:

1 That I am the appellant/applicant in this appeal by reason of which I am conversant with the facts of the case.

2. That I filed a motion for judgment in this case which was fixed for hearing for 2 days for 5th and 6th of May, 2004.

3. That the defendants filed a counter-affidavit after the fixture and I filed a reply to it which I served on the defendants through the 1st defendant by registered post and I duly filed an affidavit of service to that effect.

4. The court ruled that service by registered post on respondents was not a substituted service without dispute on the issue/mode of service and the court then awarded cost of N12, 500.00 against me.