Practice Areas
As a full service corporate commercial law firm we offer a broad range of specialized services covering the broad spectrum of corporate and commercial law practice and which are aimed at satisfying our diverse clientele’s business activities.
KOTOYE v. CBN- 1985 1 NWLR (Pt. 98) 419
PRINCIPLE OF LAW- JUSTIFICATION FOR GRANT OF AN EX PARTE ORDER OF INJUNCTION
The basis of granting any ex-parte order of injunction is the existence of special circumstances and invariably, an all – pervading real urgency, which requires that the order must be made. Otherwise, an irretrievable harm or injury would be occasioned to the prejudice of the Applicant. The price to pay however for the Applicant is an undertaking as to damages.
OMOBORIOWO v. AJASIN- (1984) LPELR- 2643 (SC)
PRINCPLE OF LAW- BURDEN OF PROOF IN ELECTION PETITIONS
There is in law a rebuttable presumption that the result of any election declared by the returning officer is correct and authentic. Any candidate challenging the authenticity therefore has the burden to rebut this presumption not by a mere complaint that the Petitioner scored a majority of lawful votes, but by a proof on balance of probabilities.
ORE ONAKOYA v. FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA- (2002) LPELR- 2670 (SC)
PRINCPLE OF LAW- EFFECT OF DUPLICITY OF CHARGE
The mere fact that a charge is bad for duplicity will not in itself ground the quashing of a conviction or warrant an order of nullity on the proceedings unless it is established it was prejudicial to the Complainant
MANNESMAN v. A. I. C- 2001 1 NWLR (Pt. 695) 457
PRINCPLE OF LAW- THE DOCTRINE OF SUBROGATION
The Court held that for all intents and purpose, a judgment creditor who seeks to rely on the provisions of Order IV Rule 9(1)(a) of the Judgment Enforcement Rules in applying for leave to issue a process shall put the intended subrogating party on notice.
OSHINLOYE v. ROWLAND-1997 4 NWLR (Pt.500) 387
PRINCIPLE OF LAW - NOTICE OF DISCONTINUANCE
The Court held that though a Plaintiff has an unqualified right to discontinue an action, where the notice of discontinuance constitutes an abuse of court process, the Court has ample jurisdiction to set it aside.
A. OBIKOYA V WEMAN BANK LTD (1989) LPELR - 21761 (SC)
PRINCIPLE OF LAW- NATURE OF GROUNDS OF APPEAL IN AN APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL
This case was an offshoot of the leading case of Wema Bank & Bronik Motors v A.O Obikoya which dealt with the limits of the jurisdiction of the Federal High Court.
SEC V. PROF. A.B KASUNMU, SAN - (2008) LPELR- 4936 (CA)
PRINCIPLE OF LAW- WHETHER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTIONS 29 AND 30 OF THE INVESTMENT AND SECURITIES ACT [ISA] RESTRICTS SOLICITORS FROM OPERATING AS CAPITAL MARKET OPERATORS
After an examination of Sections 29, 30 & 248, of the Investment and Securities Act [ISA], the Court held that the wordings of the provisions are clear and unambiguous and that it is not the necessary intendment of the ISA Act that Solicitors are amongst persons to be registered by the Securities and Exchange Commission.
National Bank of Nigeria v. N.E.T. -1986 3 NWLR (Pt. 31) 667
PRINCIPLE OF LAW- WHETHER AN APPEAL IS SINE QUA NON TO THE GRANT OF AN APPLICATION FOR STAY OF PROCEEDINGS
The court held that for an application of this nature to be successful, the appeal must not be frivolous and the grounds of appeal must be valid and arguable. Where an appeal is filed out of time and there is no pending application for an extension of time, a court must take this into account and refuse the application.
CELTEL v. ECONET- 2014 LPELR – 22430 (CA)
PRINCIPLE OF LAW- DUTY OF A COURT IN RELATION TO AN APPLICATION TO SET ASIDE AN ARBITRAL AWARD
The approach by a court called upon to set aside an arbitral award and indeed an Appellate Court sitting on appeal over the decision of the court called upon to set aside an arbitral award is not the same as when both courts are handling cases from regular courts. The Court held that arbitral proceedings are not to be subjected to scrutiny with the finesse of a toothcomb.
AKINSANYA V UBA- (1986) 4 NWLR Part 35 page 273
PRINCIPLE OF LAW- THE USE OF DOCUMENTARY CREDITS
In this case, the Supreme Court considered the extent of the liability and obligation of an issuing bank to a customer in relation to documentary credits. In arriving at its decision, the court considered the provisions of Articles 8 and 9 of the 1974 Uniform Customs Practice for Documentary Credit (UCP) and the duties imposed upon issuing banks in the UCP.
OLORI MOTORS COMPANY LIMITED AND THREE OTHERS V UNION BANK OF NIGERIA PLC- [2006] 10 NWLR PART 989 Page 586, (2006) LPELR-2589 (SC)
PRINCIPLE OF LAW - NOTICE OF DISCONTINUANCE
The Court held that though a Plaintiff has an unqualified right to discontinue an action, where the notice of discontinuance constitutes an abuse of court process, the Court has ample jurisdiction to set it aside.
EWULUM v AKINKUGBE- 2008 LPELR -346 SC
PRINCIPLE OF LAW - LEGAL IMPLICATION OF RESORTING TO SELF HELP TO RECOVER PREMISES AND WHEN AN AWARD OF DAMAGES WILL BE INTERFERED WITH BY AN APPELLATE COURT.
The Supreme Court held that a landlord who resorts to self-help in a bid to recover possession of the premises tenanted by him, runs foul of the law and is liable in damages. Further, although appellate Courts are generally very much reluctant to exercise their power and attempt to reassess the amount of damages which a trial Judge has awarded,
MELWANI v. FIVE STAR INDUSTRIES- 2002 LPELR – 1858 SC
PRINCIPLE OF LAW - WAYS IN WHICH A PRINCIPAL / AGENT RELATIONSHIP CAN BE CREATED.
In this case, the Supreme Court held that there is no statutory requirement in Nigeria that a power of attorney for an Agent to sue or defend on behalf of his Principal should be by deed therefore an action so filed by an agent will be competent.
National Bank of Nigeria v. N.E.T. -1986 3 NWLR (Pt. 31) 667
PRINCIPLE OF LAW- WHETHER AN APPEAL IS SINE QUA NON TO THE GRANT OF AN APPLICATION FOR STAY OF PROCEEDINGS
The court held that for an application of this nature to be successful, the appeal must not be frivolous and the grounds of appeal must be valid and arguable. Where an appeal is filed out of time and there is no pending application for an extension of time, a court must take this into account and refuse the application.
CELTEL v. ECONET- 2014 LPELR – 22430 (CA)
PRINCIPLE OF LAW- DUTY OF A COURT IN RELATION TO AN APPLICATION TO SET ASIDE AN ARBITRAL AWARD
The approach by a court called upon to set aside an arbitral award and indeed an Appellate Court sitting on appeal over the decision of the court called upon to set aside an arbitral award is not the same as when both courts are handling cases from regular courts. The Court held that arbitral proceedings are not to be subjected to scrutiny with the finesse of a toothcomb.