This is an appeal against the judgment of the Lagos Judicial Division of the Court of Appeal delivered on the 19th of June, 2003. The Appellants who were the 2nd, 3rd and 4th Defendants were also the 2nd, 3rd and 4th Appellants respectively at the Court below. The Plaintiff, Shoreline Lift boats Nigeria Ltd., was the sole Respondent at the Court below and the 1st Respondent herein. And the 2nd Respondent herein International Offshore Construction Ltd. was the first Defendant.
The action itself was commenced at the Federal High Court, Lagos about the 9th of February 1999 when the writ of summons was issued. Pleadings were filed, exchanged and amended. In paragraph 15 of the Amended Statement of claim the Plaintiff/1st Respondent claimed from the Defendants jointly and severally,
-
1
The sum of USS 404,000.00 (Four hundred and four thousand United State Dollars on the equivalent in Nigeria Naira) being total amount due to the Plaintiffs from the Defendants upon the Defendants' use of the Plaintiff's Lift boats known as "Shoreline VII" and for which use the Defendants have refused, failed and neglected to pay despite several demands from the Plaintiff.
-
2
The sum of N1,000,000.00 being solicitors fees already incurred by the Plaintiffs as a result of the failure of the Defendants to pay for the use of the Plaintiff's Lift boat known as "Shoreline VII" as aforesaid.
-
3
Interest at the rate of 21% per annum on the above total sum from 19th May 1997 until date of judgment and thereafter at the rate of 8% per annum until the entire judgment debt and costs are liquidated.
On the 2nd of March 2000 the only witness in the case, Commodore Salaudeen Akani (Rtd) testified and concluded his testimony. It is instructive to note that from the 9th of February 1999 when the writ of summons was issued to the 2nd of March 2000 when the sole witness commenced and concluded his testimony International Offshore Construction, Ltd., remained the only Defendant.
By a motion dated 21st of March 2000 but filed on the 24th of March 2000 the Plaintiff/1st Respondent sought the joinder of the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th Defendants/Appellants and amendment of the statement of claim. This motion was heard and granted on the 6th of June 2000. On the 9th of November 2000 Chief B.A. Ayorinde addressed the Court and the matter was adjourned for judgment.
In a motion dated the 13th of December 2000 the 1st Defendant/Appellant sought:
-
1
An order arresting or forehearing the reading, rendering, giving or pronouncement of the ruling or judgment order or decree in respect of this matter in that the Defendant was not or has not been served with any processes in this matter.
-
2
An order directing the Plaintiff/Respondent or their Counsel; if represented by Counsel to. serve all processes in this suit on Counsel to the Defendant/Appellant forthwith.
On the 14th of December this motion was argued. The application was however refused. In refusing the application the trial Court relying on Bob-Manuel v. Briggs (1995) 7 NWLR (Pt.409) 537 at 592 held that the procedure for the arrest of a judgment was alien to our Civil Procedure Rules. In the concluding part of the ruling the trial Court said:-
-
"It is trite that the jurisdiction of a Court can only be exercised in accordance with the Rules and Procedure. On the above premise I hold that the present application seeking to arrest the judgment of this Court fixed for today in the above mentioned suit is incompetent and is accordingly struck out."
The Court then proceeded to read the judgment wherein all the reliefs as claimed were granted.
Dissatisfied with the said judgment, the Defendants went on appeal to the Court below. By the unanimous judgment on the 19th of June 2003 the appeal was dismissed and the judgment of the trial Court affirmed.
The Defendants are still aggrieved by the judgment of the lower Court and have come on appeal to this Court.
