CaseLaw
Opara V. Schlumberger Ltd (2006) CLR 7(a) (SC)
Judgement delivered on July 14th 2006
Brief
Facts
The Appellant was granted a letter of allocation of two plots of land in Port Harcourt by the government of the defunct Eastern Nigeria. He was also put into possession. However, no formal deed was executed on the property before the outbreak of the Nigerian Civil war. After the war and creation of states, the land fell within the territory of Rivers State, and was identified as plots 161 and 167 Trans-Amadi Industrial Layout. Appellant subsequently granted a sub-lease of the plots to the 1st Respondent but without the consent of the Government of Rivers State, As a result, the Government (represented by the 2nd Respondent) cancelled the Appellant's lease in respect of the plots and granted the 1st Respondent, who was Appellant's tenant, certificates of occupancy on the two disputed plots. The Appellant then instituted an action at the High Court of Rivers State where he argued that he was entitled to Rights of Occupancy or Certificates of Occupancy in respect of the disputed plots because, prior to the Land Use Act, he had an equitable interest therein by virtue of the subsisting agreement for a lease between him and the 2nd Respondent and that the equitable interest was one which a Court of equity would enforce. The learned trial Judge found as a fact that the Appellant had equitable interest in the plots in dispute, but His Lordship also held that the equitable interest was unenforceable. The suit was eventually dismissed. An appeal by the Appellant to the Court of Appeal was also dismissed, thus giving rise to the instant appeal.
At the Supreme Court, learned counsel for the 1st Respondent filed a Notice of Preliminary Objection on the competence of the appeal. In the notice, he stated that the grounds of appeal contained in the Appellant's Amended Notice of Appeal were incompetent and that the Supreme Court lacked jurisdiction to hear the appeal as constituted. This, according to him, was because the grounds invite the Supreme Court to review binding and conclusive findings and decisions made by the High Court of Rivers State, which findings and decisions were not challenged by the Appellant at the Court of Appeal.
Issues
Whether an Appellant can contest at the Supreme Court any finding or...