Disable Preloader

CaseLaw

NPA V. Ajobi (2006) CLR 7(e) (SC)

Judgement delivered on July 7th 2006

Brief

  • Statute of limitation

Facts

In the High Court of Justice holden at Warri the Plaintiff's claims as endorsed on the Amended Writ of Summon read thus:-

  • i.
    Declaration that the trial of Plaintiff by the Disciplinary Panel/Tribunal set up the Defendant to investigate matters involving fraud and other associated criminal offences allegedly committed by the Plaintiff is ultra vires the Defendant, null and void.
  • ii.
    Order setting aside the findings made by the said Disciplinary Panel/Tribunal wherein the Plaintiff was found guilty of committing fraud and other associated criminal offences.
  • iii.
    An order compelling the Defendant to pay to Plaintiff all the entitlements including pension and gratuity forfeited by the Defendant consequent upon the findings of the said Tribunal/Panel.

    • IN THE ALTERNATIVE

  • iv.
    An order reinstating Plaintiff in the employment of the Defendant authority
  • v.
    An order that the Plaintiff's salaries from September, 1984 until the date of judgment be paid to him by the Defendant authority."

After the filing and exchange of pleadings, the case proceeded to trial. The Plaintiff gave evidence for himself he was cross-examined and closed his case. The case was then adjourned for the defence.

The Defendant then filed an application for dismissal of the Plaintiff’s action on the ground that the suit is statute barred by virtue of the provisions of Section 97(1) of the Ports Ordinance Cap. 155 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 1958. The said law is in pari materiel with Section 110(1) of the Ports Act, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 1990.

The learned trial Judge dismissed the application. Aggrieved, the Defendant appealed to the Court of Appeal which allowed the appeal in part. Reliefs (i), (ii) and (iii) were held to be statute barred while reliefs (iv) and (v) were held not to be caught by the limitation provisions of the Act.

Still aggrieved, the Defendant further appealed to the Supreme Court.

Issues

  • Whether the learned Justices of the Court of Appeal were right in holding that...
Read More