SPDC (Nig) Ltd & Ors V. Agbara & Ors (2020)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report

CHIMA CENTUS NWEZE, J.S.C. 

What prompted the forensic hostilities between the parties was the application of the first to the third appellants in Appeal No. SC.731/2017. Hereinafter, they shall, simply be referred to as ‘the applicants’. In the said application, filed on July 24, 2019, they beseeched the Court of the following reliefs:

1. An Order setting aside the Ruling of this Honourable Court delivered in this appeal (Appeal No. SC.731/2017) on 11th January,2019 pursuant to the application filed by the appellants/applicants on 16th July, 2018;
2. In the alternative to (1) (Supra), an Order setting aside, ex debito justiciae, the order of dismissal of appellants’/applicants’ appeal (Appeal No. SC.731/2017) as contained in the Ruling of this Honourable Court delivered on 11th January, 2019;

​3. In the alternative to (1) and (2) (Supra), an order setting aside the Ruling of this Honourable Court delivered on 11th January, 2019 in this appeal (Appeal No. SC.731/2017, dismissing appellants/applicants’ application filed on 16th July, 2018, particularly, prayers 1, 2 and 3 on the body of the said application, which were also dismissed while this Honourable Court considered and dealt with only prayer 4 on the body of the said application;

4. An order of this Honourable Court granting appellant/applicants extension of time to appeal to this Honourable Court on grounds of law against the decision of the Court of appeal, Port Harourt Judicial Division (lower Court) in Appeal No. CA/PH/396/2012 between SPDC of Nigeria and Ors v. Chief Isaac Osaro Abara and Ors delivered on June, 2017, coram, Gumel, Akeju and Jumbo-Ofo, JJCA;
5. An order of this Honourable Court granting extension of time to the appellants/applicants to seek leave to appeal to this Honourable Court on grounds other than grounds of law against the decision of the Court of Appeal, Port Harcourt Judicial Division (lower Court) in Appeal No. CA/PH/396/2012, between SPDC of Nigeria Ltd and Ors v. Chief Isaac Osaro Agbaro and Ors, delivered on 6th June, 2017, coram: Gumel, Akeju and Jumbo-Ofo, JJCA;
6. An order of this Honourable Court granting the appellants/applicants leave to appeal to this Honourable Court on grounds other than grounds of law against the decision of the Court of Appeal, Port Harcourt Judicial Division (lower Court) in Appeal No. CA/PH/396/2012 between SPDC of Nigeria Ltd and Ors v. Chief Isaac Osaro Agbara and Ors, delivered on 6th June, 2017, coram, Gumel, Akeju and Jumbo-Ofo, JJCA;
7. An order of the Honourable Court granting the appellants/applicants an extension of time within which to appeal to this Honourable Court on grounds other than grounds of law against the decision of the Court of Appeal Port Harcourt Judicial Division, (lower Court), in Appeal No. CA/PH/396/2012, between SPDC of Nigeria Ltd and Ors v. Chief Isaac Osaro Agbara and Ors., delivered on 6th June, 2017, coram: Gumel, Akeju and Jumbo-Ofo;JJCA;
8. An order of this Honourable Court granting leave to the appellants/applicants to raise fresh issues of law, jurisdiction, particularly, the constitutional issue relating to the appellants/applicants’ right to fair hearing, for the first time before this Honourable Court.

The application was supported by a twenty-five paragraph Affidavit and Forty Exhibits. A further Affidavit was equally filed on September 2, 2020 with ten exhibits. Chief Olanipekun, SAN, with Lateef Fagbemi, SAN; Kanu Agabi SAN; Dr Babalakin, SAN, for the applicants, leading Shola Bojuwoye pointed out that the initial exhibits were marked exhibits 1 – 40 while the latter exhibits were marked exhibit 41 – 51. Learned SAN drew attenetion to other processes. He adopted his written submission.

L. E. Nwosu, SAN with L. A. Lawal-Rabana, SAN; K.C.O. Njemanze, SAN; P. O. Okeaya-Inneh, SAN, leading Pauline Abduliman, for the respondents, drew attention to the Preliminary Objection filed on September 22, 2020 in which they prayed for three reliefs. He adopted his written submission with regard to the objection.

In the said objection, they prayed for:

An order dismissing in limine the purported appellants’ motion dated and filed in this Court on 24th day of July 2019 seeking inter alia an order setting aside the Ruling of Honourable Court delivered in this appeal (Appeal No. SC.731/2017) on 11th January 2019 pursuant to the application filed by the appellant/applicant on the 16th July 2018, as the same constituted a scandalous deliberate abuse and ridicule of the integrity, majesty and finality of the Supreme Court.

And for such other order(s) as this Honourable Court may deem fit or proper to make in the circumstance.

The grounds upon which the application was brought are as follows:

1. Appeal No. SC.731/2017 was commenced by Notice and grounds of Appeal to this Honourable final Court dated and filed on 16th day of June 2017 against the final judgment of the Court below in appeal No. CA/PH/396/2012 which dismissed the applicant’s appeal for:

i) Non-filing of appellant’s primary brief of argument

ii) That appellant lied on oath to various panels of the Court below that they were granted leave by the Honourable Justice Tsamiya led panel of the Court on 9th day of January 2013 to file an amended brief of argument when no such leave was applied for in their motion dated 4th and argued on the 11th January, 2013.

iii) That the appellant after withdrawing their prayer on their motion dated 26-11-2012 to deem their irregular brief as properly filed, on 3-12-2012 failed indeed, to file an appellant’s brief despite being granted seven days from 3-12-2012 and again 14 days on 9-1-2013 to file their appellants’ brief of argument. Neither did the appellants at any time thereafter even apply for extension of the time to file an appellants’ brief.

iv) That the appellants cannot purport to file amended brief of argument when indeed they had not filed any primary brief fit to be amended as they purported to do by obtaining leave under false pretence on oath vide their exhibits 5 and 7, volume 1 on their exhibit list.

v) These uncontroverted and incontrovertible findings of fact were very ably reproduced in the judgment of the Court below attached as exhibit 15 in volume 1 of the applicants’ exhibit reading from the last paragraph copied at page 234 through 246 before coming to the unanimous decision that appellants did not file a primary appellants’ brief of argument and thus dismissed the appeal.