Scirrocco Int. Limited V. Unity Bank PLC (2016)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

IBRAHIM SHATA BDLIYA, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

This is an appeal against the judgment of the Kano State High Court of Justice (hereinafter referred to as the lower Court) in suit No. K/519/2013, delivered on the 6th of February, 2014. By a Writ of Summons the respondent, as plaintiff, instituted suit No. K/519/2013 against the appellant (as defendant) at the lower Court, claiming as follows:

WHEREOF the plaintiff claims against the defendant (Jointly and Severally) for:

i. The sum of N104,145,902.58 being the principal amount plus interest as at 30th September, 2013.

ii. 26% interest on the said loan from 1st October, 2013 until judgment.

iii. 10% Court interest from the date of judgment until the entire amount is liquidated.

Dated this 28th day of October, 2013

Upon an application by the respondent, the suit was placed on the Undefended List, and marked accordingly. The marked Writ together with the supporting affidavit were served on the appellant. The appellant filed a Notice of Intention to defend the claim against it, supported by an affidavit. Learned counsel to the

parties addressed the Court. In a ruling delivered on the 6th of February, 2014, the learned trial judge of the lower Court held that no defence on the merit was disclosed by the depositions in the affidavit in support of the Notice of Intention to defend and accordingly entered judgment in favour of the respondent in terms of the Writ and statement of claim. Dissatisfied with the judgment of the lower Court, the appellant filed a Notice of Appeal on the 18th of February, 2014, consisting of six (6) grounds of appeal. Shorn of their particulars, the six (6) grounds of the Notice of Appeal are as follows:

Ground One (1)

“The lower trial judge erred in law when he held that the Defendant/Appellant has no defence on the merit and therefore refused to transfer the matter to the general cause list.”

Ground Two (2)

“The learned trial judge erred in law when he failed to consider the Defendant’s/Appellant’s defense on the interest charged by the respondent as against the agreed rate applicable to the loan which is 7% per annum.”

Ground Three (3)