Nigeria Agip Exploration Limited V. Federal Inland Revenue Service & Ors (2016)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

JOSEPH EYO EKANEM, J.C.A. (Delivering the Lead Ruling)

By a motion on notice dated 18/6/2013 and filed on 1/7/2013, the applicant seeks the following reliefs:

“1. An order granting extension of time within which the Applicant may apply for leave to cross-appeal on mixed law and facts against the ruling delivered on 30th March, 2012 by A, Bello, J of the Federal High Court, Abuja Division in Suit No.FHC/AB/CS/766/2011.

2. An Oder granting the Applicant leave to cross appeal on mixed law and facts against the ruling delivered on 30th March, 2012 by A. Bello, J of the Federal High Court Abuja Division in Suit No.FHC/AB/CS/766/2011.
3. An order granting extension of time within which the Applicant may cross appeal against the ruling delivered on 30th March, 2012 by A Bello, J of the Federal High Court’ Abuja Division in Suit No.FHC/AB/CS/766/2011.

And for such further or other orders as this honourable Court may deem fit to make in the circumstances.”Maps

The grounds for the application are that:

“1. The Applicant’s Proposed Notice of Cross Appeal Exhibit ALP5) contains very substantial grounds of Appeal including

1

but not limited to non-fulfillment of a condition precedent to institution of the 1st Respondent’s Suit before the Lower Court.

2. The inability of the Applicant to file its Cross-appeal within the time prescribed by law was due to default of its counsel.”

The application is supported by:

1. A 27 -paragraph affidavit deposed to by Ahmed Oyegbami, a Legal Practitioner in the law firm representing the applicant with Exhibits 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 attached;
2. A second affidavit in support filed on 19/3/2014 and sworn to by Ahmed Oyegbami with Exhibit ALP

AOI (Cross-appellant’s brief of argument) attached;

3. A third affidavit in support filed on 7/4/2014 and deposed to by Ahmed Oyegbami with Exhibit AOI

(proposed notice of cross appeal) attached;

4. A written address filed on 7/4/2/2014 and
5. A reply.

The 1st respondent, in opposing, the application filed a written address on 20/5/2014.

At the hearing of the motion, Mutiu Akinmade Esq; counsel for the 3rd respondent/applicant, identified adopted and relied on the processes filed on its behalf. He urged the Court to grant the application. Anthony Ayaogu, Esq; for

2