A.D.H. LTD.
V.
AMALGAMATED TRUSTEES LTD.

(2006) JELR 39799 (SC)    

Supreme Court  ·  SC.289/2002 ·  5 May 2006 ·  Nigeria
 · 
Other Citations
A.D.H. Ltd. v. A.T. Ltd. (2006) 10 NWLR (Pt.989) 635
CORAM
IDRIS LEGBO KUTIGI Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria ALOYSIUS IYORGER KATSINA-ALU Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria IGNATIUS CHUKWUDI PATS-ACHOLONU Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria SUNDAY AKINOLA AKINTAN Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria ALOMA MARIAM MUKHTAR Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria
Core Terms Beta
respondent
jurisdiction
bank
case
federal high court
appeal
lagos high court
court of appeal
discount house
financial institution
lagos state high court
federal high court act
financial services
financial world
lagos
lower court
meaning of section
preliminary objection
exclusive jurisdiction
judgment of the court of appeal
leading judgment
order of transfer
ruling of the high court
appropriate judicial division of the court
case of a simple loan facility
contrary view
corporate body
decision of the lagos high court
foreign exchange
individual customer of the respondent
lagos high court decision
learned trial judge
notice of appeal
overturned decision of the lagos high court
real issues
requisite jurisdiction
roller coaster ride
said act
said leading judgment
second reason
such description
supreme court
thomas jefferson
transfer of a case
use of the procedures of the court
vaudeville of legal playhouse
way of a commercial paper facility
wording of statutes

PATS-ACHOLONU, J.S.C. (Delivering the Leading Judgment): This appeal arose from an action filed by the appellant against the respondent. The parties had entered into an agreement whereby the appellant advanced by way of a commercial paper facility the sum of N120m to the respondent's company for 90 days only subject to an interest payable on the commercial paper. The facility was completely drawn. The security for the facility was a house, property of the respondent situate at 24A Campbell Street, Lagos, and the parties covenanted that the documents shall be deposited with the appellant. At the expiration of 90 days, the money so invested was not paid back and worse still, the respondent caused the sum to be rolled over without the express consent or permission of the appellant. When the appellant made several demands for the repayment of the facility and the interest due, and the respondent refused or failed to pay, the appellant was forced to institute an action in the Federal High …

There's more. Sign in to continue reading.

judy.legal is the comprehensive database of case law and legislation from Ghana, Kenya and Nigeria. Gain seamless access to over 20,000 cases, recent judgments, statutes, and rules of court.

Get started   Login