United Bank For Africa PLC V. Davandy Finance And Securities Limited & Anor (2015)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

PAUL OBI ELECHI, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

The 1st Respondent here in as Plaintiff of the High Court of Cross River State instituted the suit leading to this appeal by way of a Writ of Summons on the 15th November, 1999 against the Appellants and the 2nd Respondent as Defendant and claim as follows:

I. The sum of N7,259,232.00 from the Defendants jointly and severally being a loan and interest accrued thereon from the loan taken by the 1st Defendant and which payments from the proceeds of the contract executed with the loan and/or any other money that was to come into the account of the 1st Defendant to

the Plaintiff vide on irrevocable order for same to the account of the Plaintiff.

II. 10% interest per month on the said sum from October 1999 until Judgment is given and paid.

III. The sum of N250,000.00 being cost of this action.

The 1st Respondent originally instituted this action against the Appellant and 2nd Respondent by ex-parte application to place the Writ on the undefended list and filed on the 15th November, 1999 on the basis of which Judgment was given

1

in favour of the 1st Respondent in the sum of N7 ,259,232.00 only with 10% interest on the Judgment debt.

The Appellant herein only became aware of the said Judgment when the Court bailiffs stormed its Calabar Road premises of the branch with a notice of attachment dated 31st March, 2000 and proceeded to attach its properties.

Upon its Application to Court, the Judgment in default was set-aside and the Matter set down for hearing on the merit. The 1st Respondent sued and filed its Statement of Claim against two parties but proceeded against the Appellant only. The Appellant filed its Statement of Defence of 12 paragraphs denying the 1st Respondent’s claims on the 3rd March, 2005. One witness each testified for the Appellant and 1st Respondent.

ISSUE FOR DETERMINATION

The Appellant hereby posits the following issues for determination:

I. Whether the trial Court had the jurisdiction to