LawCare Nigeria

Nigeria Legal Information & Law Reports

LONESTAR DRILLING NIGERIA LIMITED v. RAY NIGERIA LIMITED (2014)

LONESTAR DRILLING NIGERIA LIMITED v. RAY NIGERIA LIMITED
(2014)LCN/6903(CA)
RATIO
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE: WHETHER A CLAIM FOR DEBT OR LIQUIDATED MONEY AND SHOULD BE ENTERED INTO THE UNDEFENDED LIST
The principles governing when a defendant will be allowed to defend an action under the undefended list are now settled. See ACB LTD. V. AWAGWALEDA (1994) 5 NWLR (PT. 342) 25 at 36, JOHN HOLT & CO. (LIVERPOOL) LTD. V. FAJEMEROKEM (1961) ANLR 427, OKAMBA LTD. V. ALHAJI SULE (1999) 7 NWLR (PT. 160) 1 and U.B.A. v. JAGARBA (2001) 43 WRN 1 where Muhammad JSC at page 15 stated.
“For an action to be transferred from the undefended list to the general cause list there must be a defence on the merit and details and particulars of defence must be set out. It must not be half hearted defence.
It must not be a defence which is merely fishing for skirmishes all over the place. see DIAMOND BANK NIGERIA LTD V. G.S.M. AGRO ALLIED IND. LTD (1999) 8 NWLR (pt. 616) 558 ……. It must be a real defence on merits and not a caricature of it.”
What was the defence of the defendant/appellant as shown in the supporting affidavit to the Notice of Intention to Defend? The affidavit disclosed
(1) that the amount claimed was being disputed see paragraph 3(d) of the affidavit.
(2) that the amount claimed was laced with fraud see paragraphs 3(f-m) of the affidavit.
(3) that the exhibited invoices attached to the claimants affidavit were not authentic. See paragraph 3 (o-q) of the defendant’s affidavit.
Having regard to the lapses in the processes filed by the from claimant, from which the defence of the defendant can draw strength I am of the respectful view that the defendant disclosed defence on merits in its Notice of Intention to Defend.
Where the affidavit in support of notice of intention to defend raises an issue where the plaintiff will be required to explain certain matters with regard to his claim or throws a doubt on the plaintiffs claim the court has a duty to ensure fair hearing by not closing the door of Juctice against the defendant but to enter the suit in the general cause list. See NWORAH V. AKPUTA (supra) at 323. Per T.O. AWOTOYE, J.C.A.