Ratio DecidendiRatio DecidendiRatio DecidendiRatio DecidendiRatio DecidendiRatio DecidendiRatio DecidendiRatio DecidendiRatio DecidendiRatio Decidendi



FEDERAL MINISTRY OF COMMERCE AND TOURISM & ANOR.
V.
EZE

(2005) JELR 45274 (CA)    

Court of Appeal  ·  CA/C/136/2001 ·  14 Jun 2005 ·  Nigeria
CORAM
DALHATU ADAMU Justice of The Court of Appeal of Nigeria CHRISTOPHER MITCHELL CHUKWUMA-ENEH Justice of The Court of Appeal of Nigeria JEAN OMOKRI Justice of The Court of Appeal of Nigeria

Ratio Decidendi

Core Terms Beta
federal high court
issues
jurisdiction
court
respondent
case
present case
trial court
enforcement procedure
fundamental rights
state high court
present appeal
subject matter
3rd issues of the appellants
due process of law
exclusive jurisdiction of the federal high court
fair hearing
required jurisdiction
said trial court
virtue of section
2nd appellant
brief of argument
constitution of the federal republic of nigeria
cross river state
fundamental rights rules
high court vis
jurisdiction of the trial court
learned trial judge
motion ex-parte
only issue
respondents brief
university of agriculture makurdi
above cited cases
above submissions
agent of the 1st appellant
basis of the respondents action
brief of arguments
closer perusal of issues
counter affidavit
earlier order of the trial court
end of hearing counsel submission
fundamental rules
incompetent jurisdiction
issue of the jurisdiction
points of law
ruling of the high court of justice
subject matter of the dispute

DALHATU ADAMU, JCA (Delivered By Leading Judgment): This appeal is against the ruling of the High Court of Justice of Cross River State, holden at Calabar (per P. M. Ekpe, J) delivered on 18/1/2000. In the case leading to the aforesaid ruling, the Respondent as an Applicant, had filed an application under the Fundamental Rules (Enforcement Procedure) Rules, seeking for the following reliefs:-

"(a) A declaration that the removal and detention of the applicant's property by 2nd appellant (an officer or agent of the 1st appellant) violates his right to fair hearing and it was not in line with the due process of law;

(b) Perpetual injunction restraining the respondents (appellants herein) from further removal and detention of his instruments of work unless it is in line with the due process of law;

(c) An Order on the respondents to release the applicant's said property like YAMAHA GENERATOR, 1 FUEL, 2 DIESEL and KEROSINE HOSTS and 4 NOZZLES FUEL, 2 DIESEL and KEROSENE NOZZLES and 1 SIGHT…

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