site logo
Skip to case content
Case Digest

DANGOTE IND. LTD V. O.B.G. & L.R. LTD (2022)

Court of Appeal (Lagos Division)

Coram
  • Obande F. Ogbuanya JCA (Presided and Read the Lead Judgment)
  • Obietonbara Owupele Daniel-Kalio JCA
  • Onyekachi Aja Otisi JCA
Parties

Appellants:

  • Dangote Industries Limited
  • Dangote Oil Refining Company

Respondents:

  • Ocean Beach Golf and Leisure Resorts Limited
  • Lagos State Environmental Protection Agency
  • Attorney-General of Lagos State
Suit number
CA/L/1191/2018
Delivered on

Background

This appeals case showcases a dispute between Dangote Industries Limited and Ocean Beach Golf and Leisure Resorts Limited concerning the construction of a permanent jetty by the appellants near the respondent's golf resort. The 1st respondent alleges that the construction led to significant environmental damage without requisite regulatory approvals, prompting legal action.

Issues

The primary issues under consideration included:

  1. Whether the appeal was competent given the failure to obtain the necessary leave for filing and the subsequent lapse of the statutory period for submissions.
  2. The implications of the lower court's interlocutory order directing parties to maintain a status quo pending the resolution of legal motions.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that the appeal lacked competency due to the appellants' failure to comply with statutory requirements regarding the agency of judicial leave and the stipulated time limits on filing appeals against interlocutory decisions.

Court Findings

The Court found the following:

  1. The order made by the lower court was an interlocutory decision, thus requiring leave of court to appeal against it.
  2. The appellants’ failure to seek an extension of time led to their appeal being time-barred and hence incompetent.
  3. A ground of appeal that involves a question of jurisdiction does not exempt the requirement for leave if it intermingles with claims of mixed law and fact.

Conclusion

Consequently, the Court of Appeal struck out the appeal, emphasizing the importance of complying with procedural mandates required for sustaining an appeal. The ruling underscored that even in the presence of jurisdictional questions, statutory procedures must be strictly followed.

Significance

This case illustrates the critical importance of adhering to procedural rules in judicial processes. The ruling emphasizes that the failure to secure necessary approvals and comply with legal timelines can render an appeal incompetent, regardless of merit.

Counsel:

  • O. S. Sowemimo, SAN (Appellants)
  • Adeleke Adepoju, Esq. (1st Respondent)