Disable Preloader

CaseLaw

Fabunmi V. Oyewusi (1992) CLR 1(h) (CA)

Brief

  • S.18 Court of Appeal Act
  • Abuse of Court process
  • Stay of execution of judgement
  • Appeal against judgement

Facts

The respondents sued the appellants/applicants for possession of some parcels of land belonging to the plaintiffs, N10,000 (Ten thousand Naira) against each of the defendants for use and occupation of the respective portions of the land in dispute occupied by them and perpetual injunction restraining the defendants, their servants and agents or privies from doing anything to or on the land.

The plaintiff, who will hereafter be referred to as the respondent worded his claim against the defendant (hereafter to be referred to as appellant) as follows at paragraphs 4 and 8 of his "Amended Statement of Claim and Defence to counter-claim".

  • "4.
    At the request of the defendant, the plaintiff granted the defendant overdraft/loan facilities with interest and bank charges thereon and interest at the rate 111/2% per annum, which interest charge was in compliance with Central Bank rate of interest".
  • "8.
    Whereof the plaintiff claims the said sum of N102,416.54 from the defendant being the outstanding credit and/overdraft facilities including interest and bank charges as at April, 1987 which interest continue to accrue at the rate of 15% per annum till the judgment and thereafter 5% interest on the judgment debt until final liquidation of the judgment debt".

The plaintiffs got their claims for possession of the parcels of land and an injunction. Four Thousand Naira was awarded against each of the appellants/applicants for the use and occupation of the land in dispute.

Appellants/applicants, aggrieved by the judgment of the lower court, appealed to the Court of Appeal which dismissed their appeal and affirmed the judgment of the court below.

They further appealed to the Supreme Court but while the appellants appeal at the Supreme Court and application for stay were pending, respondents caused a writ of possession to be issued and executed on the properties in dispute thereby forcefully ejected the applicants and their families.

Applicants then brought an application praying the Court of Appeal to set aside the writ or possession and directing that they be restored into possession of the land.

Issues

  • 1.
    Whether the applicants herein are entitled to the grant of an order...
    Read More