Disable Preloader

CaseLaw

Agro Dev Ltd V. Northern Reefer (2009) CLR 5(j) (SC)

Judgement delivered on May 29th 2009

Brief

  • S.417 CAMA

Facts

The Plaintiff, who is the present Appellant and Respondent in the lower Court instituted an action against the present Respondents at the trial Court claiming the sum of $2,500,000.00 as special and general damages arising from the breach of contract of carriage of goods and for negligence relating to a cargo of frozen fish evidenced by seven bills of lading issued by or on behalf of the present Respondents, then Defendants. Though the claim is stated to be against the Defendants/Respondents jointly and severally, as against the 1st Defendant/Respondent i.e MV Northern Reefer, it is in rem and in personam as against the 2nd and 3rd Defendants/Respondents.

Following the service of the processes on the Defendants, the Defendants/Respondents filed an application in the trial Court praying for the following reliefs:-

  • a
    An order dismissing or in the alternative striking out this action or alternatively.
  • b
    An order discharging the order of arrest of the 1st Defendant.

The application was dismissed by the trial Court resulting in an appeal to the lower Court, by the present Respondents.

In the course of the proceedings in the lower Court in respect of the said appeal, the present Respondents, who are the Appellants before that Court, brought an application praying the Court for the following orders:-

  • i
    An order granting leave to the Appellants to amend then- Notice of Appeal dated 29th July, 1999.
  • ii
    An order for extension of time to apply for leave to appeal on grounds of mixed law and fact.
  • iii
    An order for leave to appeal on grounds of mixed law and fact.
  • iv
    An order for extension of time within which to appeal,
  • v
    An order directing a departure from the Rules of this honourable Court to enable the Appellants compile the Records of Appeal may be heard.
  • vi
    An order deeming as properly filed and served the said Records of Appeal, filed on 7th March, 2000.
  • vii
    An order of accelerated hearing of the appeal herein and abridging of time within which parties may file their briefs of argument in this appeal."

The present Appellant opposed the application on the ground that the application is incompetent as the Applicant is said to be under liquidation necessitating the obtaining of the leave of the Court under the provisions of Section 417 of the Companies and Allied Matters Act (C. A. M. A.).

Issues

"Whether the third Defendant requires leave of Court to appeal...

Read More