Disable Preloader

CaseLaw

Daily Times (Nig.) V. Amaizu (1999) CLR 11(o) (CA)

Brief

  • Service of process on a limited liability company
  • Documents sent by registered post (Proof of)

Facts

Hon. Justice Patrick I. Amaizu, as he then was, felt aggrieved by the publication at page eleven of the Daily times Newspaper of 1st December, 1995. The Newspaper was published by The Daily Times of Nigeria PLC. He went to Court and took out a writ against The Publisher of the Newspaper and two others. The others were Chief D. O. Onyeka and Chief Gabriel Mbanisi. The court of trial was Anambra State High Court Coram Emekwu J. Justice Amaizu plaintiff sought against the defendants jointly and severally the following reliefs:

  • a
    N100,000,000.00 (One hundred Million Naira) aggravated or in the alternative exemplary damages.
  • b
    Public apology the text of which must be approved by the plaintiff in a National Newspaper of plaintiff's choice.

1st and 2nd Defendants, now 2nd and 3rd Respondents were served pursuant to an order of Court by substituted means. The court processes were pasted on the doors of their respective houses.

The 3rd defendant who is the Appellant before us was served at its headquarters in Lagos No. 3, 5 & 7 Kakawa Street. The Appellant entered conditional appearance on the following grounds:-

  • i
    That the court has no jurisdiction to entertain the plaintiff 's alleged claim in this suit against the Defendant for the reason that the 3rd Defendant was not and/or has not been served with the originating process in this suit and/or.
  • ii
    Alternatively, that where the said originating process was served on the Defendant, which is not conceded, the service is defective null, void and of no legal effect and should be set aside by the court.

    • The Appellant subsequently filed a motion on notice challenging the jurisdiction of the trial court on the same grounds on which conditional appearance was entered.

    In a considered ruling, the trial judge found Appellant's objection without merit. The Application was dismissed.

    The appellant was dissatisfied with the ruling, and appealed to the Court of Appeal.

Issues

  • 1
    Whether the court processes were property served on the appellant...
    • Read More