site logo

AFRICAN RE-INSURANCE CORPORATION V. GILAR COSMETIC STORE (L) (2009)

case summary

Court of Appeal (Lagos Division)

Before Their Lordships:

  • Monica Bolna’an Dongban-Mensem JCA
  • Bode Rhodes-Vivour JCA
  • Hussein Mukhtar JCA

Parties:

Appellant:

  • African Re-Insurance Corporation

Respondent:

  • Gilar Cosmetic Store
Suit number: CA/L/460/05Delivered on: 2009-07-14

Background

This case involves African Re-Insurance Corporation (the appellant) appealing against the ruling of the High Court of Lagos State which upheld the registration of a foreign judgment from a Liberian court in favor of Gilar Cosmetic Store (the respondent). The original judgment was delivered on April 5, 2001, and registered in Nigeria on September 29, 2004, approximately three years after the original ruling. The appellant contended that the registration occurred outside the statutory twelve-month window established by the Foreign Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act, and thus was not valid without an extension.

Issues

The key issues for determination in this appeal included:

  1. Whether the registration of the foreign judgment made after the expiration of twelve months without an extension would be set aside.
  2. The jurisdiction of the Liberian court where the judgment was initially awarded.
  3. The requirement of having been served notice of the proceedings in the Liberian court.

Ratio Decidendi

The court noted that under Section 10 of the Foreign Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act, Cap. F35, a foreign judgment must be registered within twelve months of its delivery unless an extension is granted by a superior court. The court found that the registration made after the twelve-month period without seeking an extension rendered the registration void.

Court Findings

The appeal was allowed on the grounds that:

  1. The registration of the Liberian judgment after the statutory period was incompetent and thus could not stand.
  2. There was no evidence of the respondent having applied for the necessary extension within the given timeframe.
  3. The provisions of the applicable statute must be strictly adhered to, as they dictate the enforceability of foreign judgments.

Conclusion

The Court of Appeal set aside the ruling of the lower court, determining that the foreign judgment registered had lapsed and was therefore unenforceable. The appellant's appeal was meritorious, resulting in costs awarded against the respondent.

Significance

This case underscores the importance of adherence to statutory timeframes when registering foreign judgments in Nigeria. It highlights the necessity for parties seeking enforcement of such judgments to ensure compliance with the provisions of the relevant acts to avoid statutory bar due to lapses in registration efforts.

Counsel:

  • K.S. Lawal, Esq. - for the Appellant
  • Paul C. Ananaba (with him, Okey Barrah) - for the Respondent