n Compulaw - 1st Indigenous Digital Law Library
Disable Preloader

CaseLaw

Ogboru.. & Ano. V. Uduaghan (2013) CLR 6(e) (SC)

Judgement delivered on June 21st 2013

Brief

  • Abuse of Court Process – Meaning of
  • Abuse of court process – Whether court has power to prevent
  • Counsel – Duty of
  • Counsel – Scope and authority over case
  • Counsel – whether client is bound by steps taken by
  • Motions – Available options open to party when struck out

Facts

The two appeals in this case were by the order of the Supreme Court consolidated and fixed for hearing on the 25th of March, 2013. On the said date, the three sets of Respondents through their respective Counsel intimated the Court of their Notices of Preliminary Objections challenging the competence of the application on notice filed by the Appellants/Applicants on the 19th of November, 2012. On the onset and just before the hearing of the appeal, the Learned Counsel representing the Appellants informed the Court of the aforementioned existing motion which seeks for three reliefs predicated on 24 grounds . The totality of the application is for an order of this Court setting aside its decision made on the 2nd day of March, 2012 in the two consolidated appeals SC.18/2012 and SC.18A/2012. At this point and as revealed from its proceedings on the 15th of October, 2012 the Court informed itself of a similar motion by the same Applicants which was withdrawn and struck out on an oral application by a different Counsel who represented the Appellants/Applicants. As a result of this discovery, the Applicant's Counsel was called upon to address the Court as to why the application should not be treated as an abuse of court process in view of the earlier similar application which was struck out on the 15th of October, 2012.

Issues

Whether or not the application filed on the 19th of November, 2012 in view of...

Read More