The Attorney-general Of Edo State & Anor V. Churchgate Industries Limited & Anor (2016)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

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

This appeal emanated from the Judgment of the Federal High Court, Benin Judicial Division, Edo State in Suit No: FHC/B/CS/127/2003 CHURCHGATE INDUSTRIES LIMITED AND 1 OTHER VS ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF EDO STATE AND 1 OTHER delivered on the 30th day of January 2012, wherein the lower Court committed the 1st Appellant to prison until he purges himself by complying with the order of the lower Court of 7/11/2003 and file affidavit of compliance to that effect.

Briefly, the facts of the case are that the Respondents as Plaintiffs brought an action against the Edo State Government solely to enforce the agreement with the Edo State Government in the management and control of the 2nd Respondent.

The 1st Appellant who was the Attorney-General of Edo State was sued in his official capacity as a representative of Edo State Government.

On 7/11/2003, the 1st Respondent obtained an order of injunction restraining the Edo State Government i.e. the 1st Appellant from interfering with the 1st Respondent in the management of the 2nd Respondent which was being operated by the

1

agents of the Edo State Government.

The Edo State Government, dissatisfied with the Ruling, appealed to this Court on 15/11/2003.

On the 17th day of October 2006, this Court in its Judgment dismissed the appeal. The Edo State Government, dissatisfied with the decision of the Court of Appeal, further appealed to the Supreme Court on 30/10/2006.

As at the time of filing briefs in this Court, the appeal before the Supreme Court was subsisting.

Despite the pending appeal against the order of interlocutory injunction before the Supreme Court, the 1st Respondent initiated contempt proceeding against the Attorney-General of Edo State upon which he was convicted on the 30th day of January 2012.

The Appellants, being dissatisfied with the decision of the trial Court which committed the 1st Appellant to prison, appealed to this Court.

The learned counsel for the Appellants formulated three issues for the determination of the appeal. The issues are set out as follows:

(1) Whether the committal proceedings which resulted in the imprisonment of the 1st Appellant for contempt of Court without proof of personal service on him of the