ALHAJI JIBRIN HASSAN v DR MUAZU BABANGIDA ALIYU

Subject Matter: Jurisdiction, Statute of Limitation, Immunity Clause Section 308.

Statute of Limitation: Action against an act or omission of Public Officers-same must be instituted within 3 Months of the commission of the act or omission complained of: Section 2(a) Public Officers Protection Act.
The Immunity Clause (Section 308 of the 1999 Constitution) : When the immunity clause will avail the President or a Governor.
When Section 22 of the Supreme Court Act can be invoked: The section can only be invoked where the lower courts are found to be clothed with the requisite jurisdictions to entertain and determine (a) matter but failed or neglected to do so.
Concurrent findings of lower courts: When the Supreme Court would not tamper with same.
Cause of Action and Right of action: The difference between the two.
“It is settled law that in an election or election related matter, time is of the essence. I will add that the same applies to pre-election matters. Election matters are sui generis, very much unlike ordinary civil or criminal proceedings. Appellant ought to have instituted the action soon after the substitution to keep his interest in the political contest alive but he did not. If he had, but the election went on and  the 1st respondent was sworn in as Governor, by the authority in Amaechi .Vs.INEC supra, section 308 of the 1999 Constitution would have been rendered a toothless bull dog” – per Walter Samuel Onnoghen

Click to View Case

Advertisements

Nigerian Social Insurance Trust Fund Management Board (Formerly National Provident Fund Management Board v. Klifco Nigeria Ltd

Subject Matter:

NSITF Contribution – Recovery of Debt

Evidence:  Admissibility of Certificate of Indebtedness

–          Section 91(3)  of the Evidence Act

–          Section 38 of the National Provident Fund Act

Statute-barred Debt: Statute of Limitation – Circumstances where statute barred debt can be revived.

“What I must further state as settled law is that the Law of Limitation here has not extinguished the right to the debt; the instant debt has not been extinguished but it merely bars the right to recover the debt because of lapse of specified period of time in the law of Limitation from the accrual of cause of action. However, where there is acknowledgement of debt, which must be in writing signed by the party that is liable, the right to recover the debt by action is revived and what constitutes acknowledgement in such causes is a matter of fact in each case…”

– per CHUKWUMA-ENEH, JSC

Click here to view case