Nigerian Maritime Administration And Safety Agency V. The Hon. Captain Emmanuel Ihenacho & Ors (2016)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

SAMUEL CHUKWUDUMEBI OSEJI, J.C.A.(Delivering the Leading Judgment)

This is an appeal against the Ruling of the High Court of Lagos State delivered by S.B.A CANDIDE-JOHNSON J. on the 27th day of October 2014 in Suit No LA/ADR/91/2013 wherein the Appellant€™s preliminary objection challenging the jurisdiction of the trial court to entertain the Suit was dismissed.

In brief, the facts of the case are that the 1st Respondent herein who was a former Minister of Interior is the Chairman/Chief of Executive of the 2nd Respondent (Integrated Oil and Gas Limited). Sometime in August 2012 the 2nd Respondent signed a €œThrough put Agreement€ with PDR Ventures Ltd (PDR) wherein PDR agreed to store 3000349 metric tonnes of Diesel in a tanker farm owned by the 2nd Respondent at Ibafon Apapa, Lagos State.

The said diesel was conveyed by a ship called €œMT GRACE€ and on arrival to Lagos with the said cargo of diesel, on the 29-8-2012, the said ship was boarded by the Nigerian Navy, the Department of Petroleum Resources and the Customs and Excise for inspection and clearance. Upon clearance, the aforesaid agencies accompanied the ship to the Tank farm where the diesel was discharged and the ship allowed to depart therefrom. The said diesel was thereafter sold to the public.

However, about 12 days after the departure of the ship €œMT Grace€, the 3rd to 5th respondents who are officers of the Appellant herein, together with the officers of the Nigerian Police and other armed forces invaded the said, 2nd Respondent€™s Tank Farm on the allegation that the diesel earlier discharged by €œMT Grace€ was stolen. Five top staffers of the 2nd Respondent were arrested and detained at the 3rd Respondent€™s office and later transferred to the office of the State Security Services (SSS) for interrogation.

On 14-9-2012 the same group of persons returned back to the Tank Farm, got it sealed up and arrested the 1st Respondent who was subsequently released after interrogation. On the same date, the 3rd Respondent and the Appellants issued a press release to the effect that the 1st Respondent was arrested in connection with sea robbery and oil theft and which press release was reported in Thisday and Punch Newspapers as well as on the internet. These publications were considered libellous by the Respondents who consequently commenced a Suit at the trial court claiming damages and injunctive reliefs from the Appellants and the 3rd Respondent.

The Appellant herein reacted by filing a motion on notice supported by a written address challenging the jurisdiction of the Lagos State High Court to entertain the Suit. The 1st and 2nd Respondents in opposing the said motion, filed a counter-affidavit and written address. In a considered Ruling delivered on 27-10-14 the trial court dismissed the Appellant€™s objection to jurisdiction.

The Appellant was not satisfied with the Ruling and consequently filed a Notice of Appeal dated 6-11-2014 but filed on 4-11-2014.

Briefs of argument were subsequently filed and served by the parties and same were respectively adopted at the hearing of the Appeal on 4-2-2016. The 3rd to 5th Respondents did not however file any brief of argument.

In the Appellant€™s brief of argument filed on 29-12-2014 but deemed properly filed and served on 24-3-2015 two issues were formulated from the three grounds of Appeal as follows:-

€œIn the light of the provisions of Section 251(1) of the Constitution of Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) and other Acts vesting jurisdiction in the Federal High Court as variously interpreted by the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal in several binding judicial precedents, whether the High Court of Lagos State has the requisite jurisdiction to entertain the Suit in which agencies of the Federal Government of Nigeria were sued as defendants

In respect of executive or administrative decisions or actions they took against the 1st-2nd Respondents. (Grounds 1 and 2 of the Notice of Appeal)

(ii) Whether the trial court was right in refusing to strike out the suit on the additional grounds that the suit is Statute barred and that several persons whom serious criminal and tortuous allegations were made against in the statement of claim were made parties to the suit.(Grounds 1 and 2 of the Notice of Appeal)

In the 1st and 2nd Respondents€™ brief of argument dated and filed on 15-6-2015, the following two issues were also formulated for determination. Viz:-