Investors International (London) Limited V. First Bank Of Nigeria Plc (2007)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

ISA AYO SALAMI, OFR, J.C.A.

The claim leading to this appeal was initiated by a writ of summons accompanied by a statement of claim. The claimant’s claims are for US $118,821,947.00 said to be the aggregate sum of the principal, accrued interest and under writing fees due under a loan guarantee by the defendant together with interest thereon at the rate of 7% per annum; injunction restraining the defendant from disposing or dissipating its assets pending the determination of the suit.

This was followed by a spate of applications viz:-

(a) Claimant’s motion for summary judgment dated 13/7/2004;

(b) defendant’s first notice of preliminary objection to the court’s territorial jurisdiction;

(c) claimant’s motion dated 25/8/2004 for injunction and order to strike out the defendant’s notice of preliminary objection;

(d) defendant’s second notice of preliminary objection dated 22/9/2004 for order to strike out the claimant’s motion on notice dated 25/8/2004;

(e) claimant’s motion for judgment in default of pleadings; and

(f) defendants third notice of preliminary objection dated 16/11/2004 urging upon the court to dismiss claimants application dated 11/11/2004.

At the pre-trial conference the parties were unable to agree on the order to proceed with the host of applications pending before the court within the limited time at the disposal of the court. They assumed irreconcilable and dramatically opposed positions on the agenda to be adopted in disposing of the various interlocutory matters placed before the court. The claimant proposed that its application for summary judgment be taken together with the defendant’s notice of intention to rely on a preliminary objection. On the contrary, the defendant wanted its preliminary objection isolated and solely determined before there could be consideration and determination of the supplication for summary judgment.

Consequently, learned trial judge offered the parties opportunity to be heard and requested them to file briefs in support of their respective positions. Having heard the submissions of counsel, both written and oral, in a reserved and considered ruling learned trial judge, Olateru-Olagbeji, J., concluded thus:-

“Considering the guidelines of the appellate authorities on this issue, mindful of limited time that I have for the consideration of the applications filed by the parties herein, it is my view that taking the two applications together will be more judicious and economic management of the time of court than taking them one at a time.

In the circumstances order be and is hereby made that the claimant’s application for summary judgment dated 13/7/2004 and the defendant’s notice of preliminary objection dated 16/8/2004 be and are hereby fixed for hearing and adoption of written addresses on Tuesday 8/2/2004, at 1 p.m.”

The ruling of the learned trial judge was motivated by the need to have just and expeditious dispensation of justice. The defendant, on the other hand, is not interested in just and speedy dispensation of justice. In spite of welter of authorities in support of the decision of the learned trial judge, the defendant felt unhappy and being aggrieved appealed to this court on eight grounds of appeal.