site logo
Skip to case content
Case Digest

AKPAN VS. UNION BANK OF NIGERIA PLC (2003)

Court of Appeal (Calabar Division)

Coram
  • Dennis Onyejife Edozie, JCA (Presiding)
  • Simeon Osuji Ekpe, JCA
  • Sule Aremu Olagunju, JCA
Parties

Appellant:

  • Akpan Sunday Akpan (Trading as Asucey (Nig) Enterprises)

Respondents:

  • Union Bank of Nigeria Plc
  • Anthony Oscar Okon
Suit number
CA/PH/177m/98
Delivered on

Background

This case centers around the legal dispute between Akpan Sunday Akpan, the appellant, and Union Bank of Nigeria Plc, alongside Anthony Oscar Okon, the plaintiff/respondent. The appellant had mortgaged a property to the bank as collateral for a loan, and a public auction followed due to default on payments. The central contention was whether there was a pending suit that would invoke the doctrine of lis pendens, effectively preventing the sale of the property while litigation was ongoing.

Issues

The primary issues for determination in this case were:

  1. Whether there was a pending suit at the time of sale to invoke the doctrine of lis pendens.
  2. If so, whether the appellant had effectively discharged the burden of proving the existence of such a suit.

Ratio Decidendi

The court concluded that:

  1. The sale of the property was lawful as the appellant failed to demonstrate a pending suit at the time of the sale.
  2. The doctrine of lis pendens applies only if the opposing party has been officially notified of the litigation, which was not established in this case.

Court Findings

The court examined several key points in reaching its judgment:

  1. The appellant's suit No. HU/52/93 was struck out for lack of prosecution prior to the sale, meaning it did not constitute a live action to affect the proceedings.
  2. There was a lack of evidence to substantiate that the bank had knowledge of any pending litigation prior to the sale.

Conclusion

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, affirming that the lower court's judgment was supported by the evidence presented and consistent with the principles of law regarding lis pendens.

Significance

This case has substantial implications for property law in Nigeria, particularly regarding the treatment of pending litigation and the rights of purchasers. It reinforces the principle that for a party to claim protection under the doctrine of lis pendens, they must provide clear evidence that the other party was notified of pending litigation and that the litigation remains active.

Counsel:

  • Obong Mike Akpabio - for the 1st Defendant/Respondent
  • Amanim Akpabio, Esq. - for the Plaintiff/Respondent