Hope Uzodinma V. Senator Osita B. Izunaso & Ors (2011)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

JIMI OLUKAYODE BADA, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

This Appeal NO:-CA/A/51/2011 was consolidated with Appeal NO:- CA/A/51A/2011 by the order of this Court made on the 28th day of March 2011. The said Appeals are against the Judgment of the Federal High Court Abuja delivered on the 28th day of January 2011.

Briefly, the facts of the case are that the 1st Respondent who was the Plaintiff at the lower Court commenced this action by Originating Summons filed on 11/1/2011. The Originating Summons was later amended on 24/1/2011. (See Pages 192 – 195 of the Record of Appeal).

The Appellant in response to the Amended Originating Summons filed among others a Counter-Affidavit and written address in opposition to the action. There was also a Notice of Preliminary Objection filed on behalf of the Appellant.

At the conclusion of trial, the learned trial Judge entered Judgment in favour of the 1st Respondent who was the Plaintiff at the lower Court. All the reliefs sought in the Amended Originating Summons were granted.

The Appellant was dissatisfied with the said Judgment and he appealed to this Court.

The learned Senior Counsel for the Appellant stated that he filed two Notices of Appeal, one on 31/1/2011 and the other on 9/2/2011. He relied on the two Notices of Appeal initially but he later applied to rely on the Notice of Appeal filed on 9/2/2011. In the circumstance the Notice of Appeal filed on 31/1/2011 is hereby struck out.

The Notice of Appeal filed on 9/2/2011 on behalf of the Appellant is made up of ten grounds.

The learned Counsel for the Appellant formulated three issues for determination out of the ten Grounds of Appeal. The issues are set out as follows:-

“(a) Whether there was any proof before the trial Court that the Appellant was served the originating processes so as to activate the Jurisdiction of the Court.

(b) Whether the failure of the learned trial Judge to properly evaluate evidence and pronounce on all the issues raised by the Appellant was a breach of fair hearing occasioning a miscarriage of Justice.

(c) Whether it was appropriate for the 1st Respondent to have commenced this action by Originating Summons when issues and facts were disputed and contentious.”

The learned Senior Counsel for the 1st Respondent adopted the 3 issues for determination formulated in the Appellant’s brief of argument.

At the hearing, the learned Senior Counsel for the Appellant referred to the Appellant’s brief filed on 17/3/2011 while the Reply brief of argument was filed on 25/3/2011.