hbriefs-logo

Lydia Modupe Lawal-osula & Ors v. Chief Saka Lawal Osula & Ors (1995) – SC

Start

💎 CASE SUMMARY OF:

Lydia Modupe Lawal-osula & Ors v. Chief Saka Lawal Osula & Ors (1995) – SC

by PaulPipar

💎 THEME(S)

– stay of execution;
– court orders;

💎 PARTIES

APPELLANTS
Lydia Modupe Lawal-Osula & Ors

v.

RESPONDENTS
Chief Saka Lawal Osula

💎 CITATION

(1995) LPELR-SC.66/1993;
(1995) 9 NWLR (Pt.419) 259;
(1995) 3 SCNJ 60;

💎 COURT

Supreme Court

💎 LEAD JUDGEMENT DELIVERED BY:

Wali, JSC

💎 LAWYERS WHO ADVOCATED

* FOR THE APPELLANT

* FOR THE RESPONDENT

– Mr. C. Aghoja
– Mr. Evbuomwan

💎 FACT

💎 ISSUE(S)

(i) Stay of execution of the orders contained in the judgment of the Court of Appeal, Benin Division delivered on December 11, 1992 pending the determination of the appeal already filed and entered in this Honourable Court.

(ii) An interlocutory injunction restraining the 1st plaintiff/respondent by himself, his servants, agents or privies from taking over, disposing of or otherwise dealing with the real and personal property presently comprised in the estate of the Late Usman Mofeyintioluwa Lawal-Osula pending the determination of the appeal already filed and entered in this Honourable Court.

Available:  John Nwachukwu v. The State [1986]

💎 HOLDING & RATIO DECIDENDI

[APPEAL: DISALLOWED]

The Court granted in favour of the Respondent.

RATIO:

i. The affidavit evidence shows that the applicants are acting in contravention of the Court of Appeal orders when they proceeded to assign the landed properties in Exhibits 01 and 02 to UTC Nigeria Ltd. and Saidi Hotel Ltd. respectively. It is the duty of the courts to protect and ensure that orders lawfully made are not rendered useless or nugatory by the action and conduct of the parties.

Available:  Niger Construction Ltd v. Chief A.O. Okugbeni (1987)

ii. I wish to emphasize here that the judgment of the Court of Appeal and the orders contained therein are still subsisting. The appeal against the judgment is still pending before this court, there is no order staying or suspending the orders of the Court of Appeal, therefore, the applicants are no doubt in contempt of the said judgment by their acts and conduct.

💎 REFERENCED

💎 SOME PROVISIONS

💎 RELEVANT CASES

💎 NOTABLE DICTA

⦿ NO FAVOUR OF COURT’S DISCRETION FOR A CONTEMNOR
✓ A person who is in contempt of a subsisting court order is not entitled to be granted court’s discretion to enable him continue with the breach. As long as the applicants continue in their contempt of disobeying the orders contained in the judgment of the Court of Appeal, this court will not exercise its discretionary powers in their favour. – Wali, JSC. Lawal-Osula v. Lawal-Osula (1995)

Available:  Sharing Cross Educational Services Limited v. Umaru Adamu Enterprises Limited & Ors (2020)

✓ On a careful reading of the affidavits in support of the application and the counter-affidavits in opposition to it, one is left in no doubt that the applicants have not complied with any of the orders of the court below made 11//12/92. Infact, they are still dealing with the properties comprised in the estate as if there were no injunctive orders. – Ogwuegbu, JSC. Lawal-Osula v. Lawal-Osula (1995)

✓ Where an applicant is in continuing disobedience of the order of the court and has not the least intention of complying with it as in this case, it will be improper for the court to consider the exercise of its discretion in his favour. – Ogwuegbu, JSC. Lawal-Osula v. Lawal-Osula (1995)

End

SHARE ON

Email
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Telegram
WhatsApp

Form has been successfully submitted.

Thanks.

This feature is in work, and currently unavailable.