LawPavilion Online


Back

NIGERIAN MARITIME ADMINISTRATION SAFETY AGENCY (NIMASA) v. MUTUAL BENEFIT ASSURANCE

(2018) LPELR-43511(CA)

In The Court of Appeal of Nigeria

On Friday, the 19th day of January, 2018

CA/L/84/2011(R)


Before Their Lordships

MOHAMMED LAWAL GARBA Justice of The Court of Appeal of Nigeria

JOSEPH SHAGBAOR IKYEGH Justice of The Court of Appeal of Nigeria

YARGATA BYENCHIT NIMPAR Justice of The Court of Appeal of Nigeria


Between

NIGERIAN MARITIME ADMINISTRATION
SAFETY AGENCY (NIMASA) - Appellant(s)

AND

MUTUAL BENEFIT ASSURANCE - Respondent(s)


Other Citations

; ;


Summary

INTRODUCTION:
The is a ruling on an application for leave of Court to amend Notice of Appeal.
FACTS:
This Ruling is predicated upon an application brought by way of a Motion on Notice brought by the appellant/applicant praying this Court for the following:
"1. An order of this Honourable (sic) granting leave to the appellant/Applicant to appeal an additional grounds of appeal against the judgment of the Honourable Justice C.E. Archibong delivered on the 1st of November, 2010, in Suit No: FHC/L/CS/56/05: MUTUAL BENEFIT ASSURANCE PLC V NIGERIAN MARITIME ADMINISTRATION SAFETY AGENCY (NIMASA), which additional grounds of appeal are highlighted as grounds and 5 and 7 in the schedule of proposed additional grounds of appeal hereunder and are contained in grounds 5 and 7 of the proposed Amended Notice of Appeal attached to the affidavit in support of this application and marked as Exhibit "FOF3".
2. An order of this Honourable Court granting leave to the Appellant/Applicant to amend grounds 1 to 10 in the Notice of Appeal dated 12/11/2010 by incorporating the additional grounds of appeal and also to amend the said grounds 1 to 10 of the subsisting Notice of appeal by substituting the said grounds of appeal with the underlined grounds 1 to 9 of the Proposed Amended Notice of Appeal.
3. An order of this Honourable Court striking out the respondent's Brief of Argument dated 3/6/2011 and filed on the same date for violating the provisions of Order 18 Rule 3(6) of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2011.
4. Such further order or other order as this Honourable Court may deem fit to make in the circumstance"

???The application is supported by an affidavit of 12 paragraphs. The Respondent filed a counter affidavit of 30 paragraphs opposing the application which prompted the Court to direct the parties to file written addresses in support of their affidavits. The written addresses were adopted at the hearing of the application.

ISSUES:
The court adopted the issue formulated by the  Appellant/Applicant for the determination of the application viz:

"Having regard the facts stated in the Appellant's affidavit in support of its application, whether the interest of justice will be best served, if the Appellant's application is granted?"
DECISION/HELD:
On the whole, the Court found the application meritorious. It was thereby allowed.


Read Full Judgment