Nigerian Laboratory Corporation & Anor. V. Pacific Merchant Bank Limited (2012)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report

IBRAHIM TANKO MUHAMMAD, J.S.C. 

In an application before the Court of Appeal (court below) holden at Lagos and dated the 21st day of July, 2004, the appellants/applicants prayed for the following reliefs:

(1) Extension of time within which the appellants/applicants may apply for leave to appeal against the Ruling of Lagos High Court per Honourable Justice O. A. Ipaye delivered on 15/01/04 in suit No: LD/3696/99.

(2) Leave to appeal against the ruling of 15/01/04 delivered by Honourable Justice O. A. Ipaye in suit No: 3696/99.

(3) Extension of time for the appellants/applicants to appeal against the ruling of 15/01/04 delivered by Honourable Justice O. A. Ipaye in suit No: LD/3696/99

(4) And for further or other orders as this Honourable Court may deem fit to make in the circumstances of this application.

In its ruling delivered on the 21st day of March, 2004, the court below refused the application and same was dismissed. Dissatisfied, the appellants appealed to this court on three grounds of appeal.

Briefs were filed and exchanged by learned counsel for the respective parties.

Learned counsel for the appellants posited the following issues for determination:

(1) Whether the court below was right in dismissing the appellants’ application dated 21st July, 2004 without considering their reasons for bringing the appeal out of time (Grounds 1 and 2 of the Notice of Appeal).

(2) Whether the said application dated 21st July, 2004 is meritorious and ought to have been granted (Ground 3 of the Notice of Appeal).

Learned counsel for the respondent posited the following issue for determination:

“Whether the Court of Appeal in refusing to grant the application dated 21st July, 2004 exercised its discretion judicially and judiciously”

Before delving into the issues for determination, there appears to be a preliminary objection which prefaced the arguments proffered by learned counsel for the respondent. Learned counsel for the respondent hinged his objection on 3 grounds: