LawPavilion Online


Back

MARINE AND GENERAL ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED v. THE HON. MINISTER OF FINANCE & ORS

(2018) LPELR-43518(CA)

In The Court of Appeal of Nigeria

On Friday, the 12th day of January, 2018

CA/L/633A/2010


Before Their Lordships

MOJEED ADEKUNLE OWOADE Justice of The Court of Appeal of Nigeria

CHIDI NWAOMA UWA Justice of The Court of Appeal of Nigeria

BOLOUKUROMO MOSES UGO Justice of The Court of Appeal of Nigeria


Between

MARINE AND GENERAL ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED - Appellant(s)

AND

1. THE HON. MINISTER OF FINANCE
2. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMMISSION
3. MR. KEHINDE AINA
(Carrying On Business as ???AINA, BLANKSON & CO.") - Respondent(s)


Other Citations

; ;


Summary

INTRODUCTION:
This appeal borders on Civil Procedure.

FACTS:
This is an Appeal against the decision/Ruling of Ejiofor J. sitting at the Federal High Court, Lagos delivered on 4th February, 2005.

By a Writ of Summons and Statement of Claim of 05-08-2004, the Appellant as Plaintiff claimed against the Respondents jointly and severally as follows:
i. A declaration that the Plaintiff has fully complied with the Provisions of Section 9(1) and (2) of the Insurance Act 2003 entitling it to continue in business as an insurer in the General Insurance business;
ii. A declaration that the cancellation of its certificate of Registration as an insurer by the 2nd Defendant purportedly acting on the approval of the 1st Defendant is illegal, wrongful and unlawful, amongst others.

On the same 5th August, 2004, the Appellant filed a Motion Ex Parte and a Motion on Notice supported by Affidavit and Exhibits and prayed the Court to restrain the Defendants Respondents from entering its premises for the purpose of taking over its business with a view for liquidation or winding up.

The Appellant's Motion on Notice was eventually moved before M. L. Shuaibu, J. on Tuesday 17th August, 2004 and a Ruling whereby the Appellant's application was refused was delivered on 23rd August 2004.The Ruling delivered by Hon. justice M. L. Shuaibu became the subject of Appeal in Appeal No. CA/L/633/2010.

The Appellant, thereafter brought another Motion on Notice praying for an order of injunction pending the hearing and determination of the Appeal filed. By its Ruling of 4th February 2005 Ejiofor, J. avoided a decision on the said prayer for injunction preferring to adjourn a definite decision on the Motion to await the Court of Appeal's decision on the appeal lodged against the Ruling of 23rd August 2004 by Hon. Justice M. L. Shuaibu.

Again dissatisfied with the said decision of Ejiofor J. to adjourn the matter pending the determination of the Appeal on the Ruling of M. L. Shuaibu J., the Appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal.

ISSUES:
The Court adopted the following issues for the determination of the appeal viz:

1. Whether the learned trial Judge had no jurisdiction to hear the Appellant's Motion on Notice for an order of interlocutory injunction pending appeal because his learned brother Judge had previously refused a Motion on Notice for an order of interlocutory injunction.

2. Whether in the circumstances of this case, the learned trial Judge was right to have chosen to adjourn the matter pending the Ruling of the Court of Appeal on the interlocutory Appeal (on the same relief, facts, arguments e.t.c.) already filed.

DECISION/HELD:
On the whole, the Court held that the appeal was meritorious and same was allowed. The matter was remitted to the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court for accelerated hearing of the Substantive suit.




Read Full Judgment