By Hameed Ajibola Jimoh Esq.
![image](/2020/10/lawreport.jpg")
One of the very commendable achievements of the immediate past
Chief Judge of FCT- Abuja (who just retired from the judicial
service few weeks ago) was the novel inclusion in the new Rules of
an injunctive (but un-appealable) provision which is contained in
the Forms: 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 prescribed by the
Rules. From my legal practice experiences (in
litigation), I understand the implications of this injunctive
provision and its importance. I have also seen on some occasions
where the registry of the High Court has always been very strict in
compliance with this injunctive provision as some court’s processes
filed without including this injunctive provision have been
rejected for filing by the registry of the Court while directing
counsel concerned to include the injunctive provision and then
retender the process for filing. This paper is aimed at commending
the efforts and or achievement of the Honourable, the
Chief Judge of the High Court of FCT-Abuja, Honourable Justice
Ishaq Usman Bello (now retired), for this great
achievement that posterity would always remember His Lordship for!
I also wish to state some of the importance and or implications of
this injunctive provision now provided in the Rules, hence, this
topic.
![image](/2021/01/payne-alex.jpg")
Forms: 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 of the Rules have similar
provisions which provide as follows ‘TAKE
FURTHER NOTICE that parties shall maintain status quo.’. This
provision in my humble view is a preservative injunction,
preserving the subject matter of litigation! I also recommend that
all other courts in Nigeria imbibe this novel legacy!
It should be noted that prior to this inclusion of this injunctive
provision, parties or litigants especially the Plaintiff/Claimant
would have to file an application for interim injunction and
interlocutory injunction in order to restrain the Defendant by
himself/herself or his/her agents or servants or assignors from
either trespassing the subject matter of litigation or tampering
with same and to preserve the subject matter of litigation pending
the hearing of the interlocutory application or pending the hearing
of the substantive suit (in the case of the interlocutory
application/injunction). These applications however lasted for some
few days and not forever except the perpetual injunction (i.e.
usually sought in the substantive suit). Furthermore, the
injunctive applications last for years even up to the Supreme Court
of Nigeria while the substantive suit remain pending in court,
hence, the entire suit lasts for years (even some of the parties or
their necessary witnesses might have even died before the
substantive suit is proceeded upon after all appeals on the
injunctive applications must have been exhausted)! The economic
impacts on the parties cannot also be overemphasized.
These negative impacts of these injunctive applications would
confirm the statement that ‘justice delayed, is justice
denied’! Fortunately and commendably, these negative
impacts have now become no more in existence since the inclusion of
the mandatory injunctive provision in the new Rules of the High
Court of FCT-Abuja! So, there is no need for parties applying for
injunctive order(s) of court anymore! In my humble view, this
injunctive provision in the Rules of the Court, stands the position
of an interlocutory injunction! These positive impacts of the
inclusion are really commendable! More so, perhaps, the registry of
the court is aware that some lawyers (with due respect to those
lawyers) are very cunning, hence, the insistence of the registry on
lawyers to include the injunctive provision in their originating
processes where necessary! So, the process must first undergo the
scrutiny of the registry of the court first before even coming
before a Judge to decide! Even where the process escapes the
scrutiny of the registry of the Court (one way or the other), any
objection to the process is likely to render the said process
incompetent having regard to the importance of the said inclusion
as the court is likely to lack procedural jurisdiction to hear such
matter where the procedures for initiating such jurisdiction has
not been complied with! Furthermore, any party served with the
originating process but goes ahead to do otherwise than as mandated
by the injunctive provision is likely to have committed contempt of
court for which he is liable to be charged with accordingly!
Therefore and finally, without any sentiment and or prejudice, I
humbly commend this great but likely unnoticed achievement of
His Lordship, Honourable
Justice Ishaq Usman Bello (now retired) and pray that
this His Lordship’s achievement as a legacy is never forgotten in
the history of the FCT Court’s system! I also recommend that all
other courts in Nigeria imbibe this novel legacy!
Email: hameed_ajibola@yahoo.com[1]
By Hameed Ajibola Jimoh Esq.
One of the very commendable achievements of the immediate past
Chief Judge of FCT- Abuja (who just retired from the judicial
service few weeks ago) was the novel inclusion in the new Rules of
an injunctive (but un-appealable) provision which is contained in
the Forms: 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 prescribed by the
Rules. From my legal practice experiences (in
litigation), I understand the implications of this injunctive
provision and its importance. I have also seen on some occasions
where the registry of the High Court has always been very strict in
compliance with this injunctive provision as some court’s processes
filed without including this injunctive provision have been
rejected for filing by the registry of the Court while directing
counsel concerned to include the injunctive provision and then
retender the process for filing. This paper is aimed at commending
the efforts and or achievement of the Honourable, the
Chief Judge of the High Court of FCT-Abuja, Honourable Justice
Ishaq Usman Bello (now retired), for this great
achievement that posterity would always remember His Lordship for!
I also wish to state some of the importance and or implications of
this injunctive provision now provided in the Rules, hence, this
topic.
Forms: 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 of the Rules have similar
provisions which provide as follows ‘TAKE
FURTHER NOTICE that parties shall maintain status quo.’. This
provision in my humble view is a preservative injunction,
preserving the subject matter of litigation! I also recommend that
all other courts in Nigeria imbibe this novel legacy!
It should be noted that prior to this inclusion of this injunctive
provision, parties or litigants especially the Plaintiff/Claimant
would have to file an application for interim injunction and
interlocutory injunction in order to restrain the Defendant by
himself/herself or his/her agents or servants or assignors from
either trespassing the subject matter of litigation or tampering
with same and to preserve the subject matter of litigation pending
the hearing of the interlocutory application or pending the hearing
of the substantive suit (in the case of the interlocutory
application/injunction). These applications however lasted for some
few days and not forever except the perpetual injunction (i.e.
usually sought in the substantive suit). Furthermore, the
injunctive applications last for years even up to the Supreme Court
of Nigeria while the substantive suit remain pending in court,
hence, the entire suit lasts for years (even some of the parties or
their necessary witnesses might have even died before the
substantive suit is proceeded upon after all appeals on the
injunctive applications must have been exhausted)! The economic
impacts on the parties cannot also be overemphasized.
These negative impacts of these injunctive applications would
confirm the statement that ‘justice delayed, is justice
denied’! Fortunately and commendably, these negative
impacts have now become no more in existence since the inclusion of
the mandatory injunctive provision in the new Rules of the High
Court of FCT-Abuja! So, there is no need for parties applying for
injunctive order(s) of court anymore! In my humble view, this
injunctive provision in the Rules of the Court, stands the position
of an interlocutory injunction! These positive impacts of the
inclusion are really commendable! More so, perhaps, the registry of
the court is aware that some lawyers (with due respect to those
lawyers) are very cunning, hence, the insistence of the registry on
lawyers to include the injunctive provision in their originating
processes where necessary! So, the process must first undergo the
scrutiny of the registry of the court first before even coming
before a Judge to decide! Even where the process escapes the
scrutiny of the registry of the Court (one way or the other), any
objection to the process is likely to render the said process
incompetent having regard to the importance of the said inclusion
as the court is likely to lack procedural jurisdiction to hear such
matter where the procedures for initiating such jurisdiction has
not been complied with! Furthermore, any party served with the
originating process but goes ahead to do otherwise than as mandated
by the injunctive provision is likely to have committed contempt of
court for which he is liable to be charged with accordingly!
Therefore and finally, without any sentiment and or prejudice, I
humbly commend this great but likely unnoticed achievement of
His Lordship, Honourable
Justice Ishaq Usman Bello (now retired) and pray that
this His Lordship’s achievement as a legacy is never forgotten in
the history of the FCT Court’s system! I also recommend that all
other courts in Nigeria imbibe this novel legacy!
Email: hameed_ajibola@yahoo.com[1]