Nigeria Case Law

Introduction A bank tried to walk away from its own lawsuit — and paid for the attempt three times over: at trial, at the Court of Appeal, and finally at the Supreme Court, where its lawyer was personally ordered to hand over five million naira. Facts of the Case The appellant, then known as Intercontinental Bank Plc, sued the three respondents at the Federal High Court, Akure, filing the full set of originating processes — writ of summons, statement of claim, list of exhibits, and copies of the exhibits themselves. The 1st and 2nd respondents responded properly, filing a statement of defence and a counter-claim of their own. At that point, the appellant changed lawyers. Its new counsel, rather than pressing on with the case, filed a notice of discontinuance — a formal withdrawal of the suit — without giving any reason for the change of heart. The trial court's response to that withdrawal was to dismiss the action outright. Unhappy with a dismissal rather than a simple wi...

Introduction What exactly does the Supreme Court mean when it says leave to appeal will only be granted in "exceptional circumstances"? This was an application by the Oba of Ikate land and nine other traditional titleholders, seeking extension of time to seek leave to appeal, leave to appeal, and a further extension of time to file the appeal itself, against concurrent findings of the trial court and the Court of Appeal. The Supreme Court, unanimously, dismissed the application. Facts of the Case The underlying dispute traced back to a suit filed at the High Court of Lagos State, Ikeja, concerning the alienation of land belonging to the Elegushi family of Ikate land — land the family said had been improperly dealt with, giving rise to a claim against Romay Sales Nigeria Limited and a second respondent. The trial court, per Akinlade, J., ruled against the family on 15th March 2018. Dissatisfied, the Oba and his fellow titleholders appealed to the Court of Appeal, Lag...

Introduction A ground of appeal that attacks a judge's character rather than the actual reasoning behind the judgment isn't much of a ground at all. This was an appeal against the decision of the Court of Appeal, which had struck out the appellant's appeal against a High Court judgment on the basis that none of his nine grounds of appeal genuinely challenged the reasoning the trial court had actually relied on. The Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision, dismissed the appeal. Facts of the Case Tony Anozia commenced an action at the High Court of Lagos State by way of an originating summons, seeking a long list of declaratory and monetary reliefs against the Inspector-General of Police, the Commissioner of Police for Kogi State, and a private individual, Ohinoyi Ado-Ibrahim. His case centred on his arrest and transfer from Lagos to Lokoja over a complaint the third respondent had made to the police — a complaint Anozia said was baseless, and which he characterised as...

Introduction A court that has no business hearing a case does not, by pointing a finger at another court, suddenly acquire the power to redirect traffic. This appeal turned on precisely that question — what should an appellate court actually do once it decides the trial court below never had jurisdiction in the first place? The Supreme Court, unanimously, allowed the appeal. Fact of the Case The first and second respondents sued the appellant, along with the third to fifth respondents, at the High Court of Lagos State. The appellant raised a preliminary objection, arguing among other things that the Lagos State High Court lacked jurisdiction over the claims, and that jurisdiction instead belonged to the Federal High Court. The trial court disagreed and held that it did have jurisdiction to hear the case. The appellant, unhappy with that ruling, appealed to the Court of Appeal — and won on that specific point. The Court of Appeal agreed that the Lagos State High Court had no jur...

Introduction A government house, two competing letters of offer, and — twenty years later — an appeal that never actually got heard on its merits, because the document bringing it to court fell apart under its own weight. The Supreme Court unanimously struck out the appeal. Facts of the Case In 2005, the Federal Government advertised certain government houses in Abuja for sale to civil servants. Both the appellant and the 1st respondent bid successfully. A letter of offer went to the appellant first, on 30th October 2005, which he accepted and paid for in full. Then, in June 2006, a second letter of offer for the same property went to the 1st respondent instead — the appellant's own offer having been withdrawn in the meantime, on the basis that the 1st respondent was senior to him at the time of the sale. Aggrieved, the appellant sued at the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, and won. The 1st respondent appealed to the Court of Appeal, which set aside the trial ...

Introduction Fifteen years of employment, a disputed dismissal, and a final judgment from the Court of Appeal that Shell simply wasn't allowed to keep fighting — this appeal never actually reached its own substance, because the Constitution had already closed the door before the Supreme Court could open it. The Supreme Court, unanimously, struck out the appeal. Fact of the Case The respondent worked as a supernumerary police officer with Shell Petroleum Development Company of Nigeria Limited from September 1993 until October 2008, when his employment was terminated following an internal "orderly room trial" that found him guilty of insubordination, discreditable conduct, and disobedience to lawful orders. The respondent challenged his dismissal before the National Industrial Court of Nigeria, Lagos Judicial Division, seeking a declaration that it was null and void, reinstatement, and payment of arrears. His position was that the orderly room trial procedure — a pr...

A note before we begin: the underlying criminal trial in this matter is not concluded. This appeal was about a preliminary ruling only — whether the trial court had the territorial jurisdiction to hear the case at all, and a procedural question about how the notice of appeal was framed. Nothing in the Supreme Court's decision below is a finding of guilt or innocence on the substantive charges, which the trial court has now been directed to continue hearing. The respondent is presumed innocent unless and until that trial concludes with a finding to the contrary. Introduction This was an appeal by the Federal Republic of Nigeria against a Court of Appeal ruling that had discharged the respondent from a money laundering and conspiracy charge, on the basis that the trial court lacked territorial jurisdiction to hear it. The Supreme Court, unanimously, allowed the appeal and sent the matter back for the trial to continue. Fact of the Case The respondent, together with seven othe...

Introduction Can an applicant rescue a stalled appeal after sitting on its rights for two years, or will the court draw a strict line against procedural indolence?  This case shows why a t wo years delay in filing an appeal is fatal and too long a time to sit on a right you say you still want to exercise. This was an application before the Supreme Court seeking extension of time to seek leave to appeal, leave to appeal, and a further extension of time to file the actual appeal, against a Court of Appeal judgment that had gone against the applicant. The Supreme Court, unanimously, dismissed the application.  Fact of the Case The applicant had sued First Bank of Nigeria Limited at the Federal High Court, Lagos, and won — Hon. Justice Hassan entered judgment in her favour on 29th September 2017. The bank, dissatisfied, appealed to the Court of Appeal, which reversed that outcome in the bank's favour on 17th April 2023. The applicant was unhappy with parts of the Court of Ap...

Does labeling a ground of appeal jurisdictional makes it so? Can a party invite the court to exercise its power and then object to the basis of exercising same?  Can allegation of fair hearing denial successfully emanate from case management decisions? Are identical briefs filed across multiple parties with aligned interest a violation of procedural rules?  How often does the Supreme court resolve matters rather than send it back to trial court to start denovo? Answers to these questions and more were proffered by the Supreme court in the Appeal  arising from a proposed merger between two Nigerian banks, undertaken as part of the Central Bank of Nigeria's recapitalization drive. Two shareholders, objecting to the merger, fought it through the trial court, the Court of Appeal, and finally the Supreme Court — which used the occasion not only to dismiss their appeal, but to directly sanction the merger itself using its own statutory powers, while delivering a pointed rebuke ...