A Federal High Court in Lagos has fixed May 12 to hear a suit by Bi-Courtney Ltd, seeking remedies for breach of a concession agreement over the Murtala Mohammed Airport.
Bi-Courtney is claiming sixty six billion naira as damages arising from an alleged breach of a concession agreement for the redevelopment of the domestic terminal of the Murtala Mohammed Airport II, Ikeja.
Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF), Asset Management Corporation of Nigeria (AMCON) and the Federal Airport Authority of Nigeria (FAAN) are the defendants
When the case was called, Mr Osita Nwosu announced appearance for the first and third defendants, and Mr Chinedu Nneke announced his appearance for the second defendant.
Meanwhile Mr Wale Akoni (SAN) announced his appearance for the plaintiff.
Mr. Nwosu then sought leave of court to move a motion seeking a stay of proceedings in the instant suit, since parties were at arbitration.
In his submission before the court, Mr. Nwosu argued that the court had earlier observed that parties were at arbitration in a sister case.
He submitted that having made such observation, the appropriate order for the court, was to stay further proceedings in the instant suit to await the outcome of arbitration.
In opposition, counsel to the plaintiff, Mr. Akoni, urged the court to dismiss the defendants motion, on the ground that they had not filed a valid notice of appeal.
He submitted that in the case before arbitration, there was a valid notice of appeal, adding that the defendant had failed to file same before the expiration of time allowed by law.
He urged the court to dismiss the motion for stay.
In a short ruling, Justice Ibrahim Buba upheld the argument of plaintiff counsel, and dismissed the defendants motion of stay of proceedings.
The court noted that it had no jurisdiction to extend the time for filing a notice of appeal after the expiration of the fourteen days allowed by law.
He, consequently, dismissed the defendant's motion for stay, and granted the plaintiff leave to amend it's originating processes.
Buba however, added that the defendants were also at liberty to make consequential amendments if required.
He fixed May 12, for hearing.
It will be recalled that Bi-Courtney had filed the suit by a writ of summons, seeking damages, declarative and injunctive reliefs over an alleged breach of agreement dated April 24, 2003.
The defendants had earlier urged the court to strike out Bi-Courtney’s suit or stay proceedings pending when arbitration was concluded.
On Nov. 9, 2015, Buba had dismissed the defendants’ preliminary objection on the ground that parties in a sister case were already in arbitration.
Dissatisfied with the ruling, the defendants had filed a notice of appeal dated Dec. 11, 2015.
They had reiterated that unless the court stayed proceedings, the Court of Appeal would be foisted with a fait accompli (an accomplished deed) and its decision would be rendered nugatory.
Bi-Courtney is claiming sixty six billion naira as damages arising from an alleged breach of a concession agreement for the redevelopment of the domestic terminal of the Murtala Mohammed Airport II, Ikeja.
Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF), Asset Management Corporation of Nigeria (AMCON) and the Federal Airport Authority of Nigeria (FAAN) are the defendants
When the case was called, Mr Osita Nwosu announced appearance for the first and third defendants, and Mr Chinedu Nneke announced his appearance for the second defendant.
Meanwhile Mr Wale Akoni (SAN) announced his appearance for the plaintiff.
Mr. Nwosu then sought leave of court to move a motion seeking a stay of proceedings in the instant suit, since parties were at arbitration.
In his submission before the court, Mr. Nwosu argued that the court had earlier observed that parties were at arbitration in a sister case.
He submitted that having made such observation, the appropriate order for the court, was to stay further proceedings in the instant suit to await the outcome of arbitration.
In opposition, counsel to the plaintiff, Mr. Akoni, urged the court to dismiss the defendants motion, on the ground that they had not filed a valid notice of appeal.
He submitted that in the case before arbitration, there was a valid notice of appeal, adding that the defendant had failed to file same before the expiration of time allowed by law.
He urged the court to dismiss the motion for stay.
In a short ruling, Justice Ibrahim Buba upheld the argument of plaintiff counsel, and dismissed the defendants motion of stay of proceedings.
The court noted that it had no jurisdiction to extend the time for filing a notice of appeal after the expiration of the fourteen days allowed by law.
He, consequently, dismissed the defendant's motion for stay, and granted the plaintiff leave to amend it's originating processes.
Buba however, added that the defendants were also at liberty to make consequential amendments if required.
He fixed May 12, for hearing.
It will be recalled that Bi-Courtney had filed the suit by a writ of summons, seeking damages, declarative and injunctive reliefs over an alleged breach of agreement dated April 24, 2003.
The defendants had earlier urged the court to strike out Bi-Courtney’s suit or stay proceedings pending when arbitration was concluded.
On Nov. 9, 2015, Buba had dismissed the defendants’ preliminary objection on the ground that parties in a sister case were already in arbitration.
Dissatisfied with the ruling, the defendants had filed a notice of appeal dated Dec. 11, 2015.
They had reiterated that unless the court stayed proceedings, the Court of Appeal would be foisted with a fait accompli (an accomplished deed) and its decision would be rendered nugatory.
No comments:
Post a Comment