Critique_of_the_High_Court_Rules_Review_-_Latest-2
➤ Gửi thông báo lỗi ⚠️ Báo cáo tài liệu vi phạmNội dung chi tiết: Critique_of_the_High_Court_Rules_Review_-_Latest-2
Critique_of_the_High_Court_Rules_Review_-_Latest-2
The Lagos State High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2012: Are We Near perfection?ByDr. Muiz BANiREj IntroductionUpon being asked by the publishers of Critique_of_the_High_Court_Rules_Review_-_Latest-2 this book to contribute a chapter to the book, the arduous task imposed upon me was how to identify the appropriate area of law to write on. The book is in honour of the Hon. Justice Phillips, (Rtd.), the immediate past Chief Judge of Lagos state. The positive reforms His Lordship made to the Lagos Critique_of_the_High_Court_Rules_Review_-_Latest-2 state judiciary during His Lordship's tenure as the Chief Judge of Lagos state defy numeracy.In this regard. His Lordship's reforms were driven by anCritique_of_the_High_Court_Rules_Review_-_Latest-2
overriding objective: speedy, effective and just dispensation of justice. Areas worthy of mention include introduction of electronic filing system (EThe Lagos State High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2012: Are We Near perfection?ByDr. Muiz BANiREj IntroductionUpon being asked by the publishers of Critique_of_the_High_Court_Rules_Review_-_Latest-2 concept into the criminal justice system for the purpose of reducing the problems associated with granting bail to an accused person undergoing trial. In line with His Lordship's reformatory efforts, I attest to the fact that His Lordship was always receptive to the comments, observations, suggesti Critique_of_the_High_Court_Rules_Review_-_Latest-2ons and opinions of all persons without considering the person's rank or year of call. 1 2 It is a consideration of the foregoing1M. A. Banire & AssocCritique_of_the_High_Court_Rules_Review_-_Latest-2
iates2Unlike the 2004 Rules, the Lagos state High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2012 was made by the Chief Judge of Lagos state pursuant to Section 8The Lagos State High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2012: Are We Near perfection?ByDr. Muiz BANiREj IntroductionUpon being asked by the publishers of Critique_of_the_High_Court_Rules_Review_-_Latest-2ction 89 of the High Court Law removes1and the necessity of ensuring a sustainable development of His Lordship’s reformatory efforts that prompted the subject matter of this paper: a critical analysis of some grey areas of the High Court of Lagos state (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2012.The Lagos state H Critique_of_the_High_Court_Rules_Review_-_Latest-2igh Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2012 made pursuant to Section 89(1) of the High Court Law, Cap H3, Laws of Lagos state of Nigeria. 2003 as amendedCritique_of_the_High_Court_Rules_Review_-_Latest-2
by High Court (Amendment Law) 2012 came into operation to address the inadequacies associated with the application of the 2004 Rules. Essentially, theThe Lagos State High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2012: Are We Near perfection?ByDr. Muiz BANiREj IntroductionUpon being asked by the publishers of Critique_of_the_High_Court_Rules_Review_-_Latest-2hasising human imperfection and recognising the dynamics of human society, it is necessary to continually appraise the Rules vis-a-vis the threshold set as its objectives. It is against this background that this paper sets out to evaluate the application of the Rules so far, with a view to rendering Critique_of_the_High_Court_Rules_Review_-_Latest-2 some suggestions towards enhancing its capability to cope with daily challenges of quality justice delivery. It is important to state from the outsetCritique_of_the_High_Court_Rules_Review_-_Latest-2
that this paper is going to be substantially pragmatic in approach, devoid of the usual theoreticalthe power to make Rules of the High Court from theThe Lagos State High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2012: Are We Near perfection?ByDr. Muiz BANiREj IntroductionUpon being asked by the publishers of Critique_of_the_High_Court_Rules_Review_-_Latest-2f Nigeria, 1999 (as amended) which confers on the Chief Judge of a state the power to make rules for regulating the practice and procedure of the High Court of the state, the former Section 89 of the High Court Law of Lagos state conferred that power on the House of Assembly.2embellishment. This is Critique_of_the_High_Court_Rules_Review_-_Latest-2desirable, not only out of space constraint, but need to avoid blurring the essentials.Our approach, therefore, will be to bring out the relevant provCritique_of_the_High_Court_Rules_Review_-_Latest-2
isions and benchmark them against the overriding objectives of the Rules as well as the rationale behind the provisions. Thereafter, a brief summary tThe Lagos State High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2012: Are We Near perfection?ByDr. Muiz BANiREj IntroductionUpon being asked by the publishers of Critique_of_the_High_Court_Rules_Review_-_Latest-2 is "the High Court of Lagos State (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2012" with a commencement date of December 31, 2012. The area of interest in this instance is mainly the effective date of application of the provisions.By Order 1, Rule 1(2), the "Rules apply to all civil proceedings in the High Court of L Critique_of_the_High_Court_Rules_Review_-_Latest-2agos state including all pending part-heard causes and matters before these Rules came into force in respect of steps to be taken or further taken inCritique_of_the_High_Court_Rules_Review_-_Latest-2
such causes of matters3."Thus, litigants in part-heard matters are to continue further prosecution of their matters in compliance with applicable ruleThe Lagos State High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2012: Are We Near perfection?ByDr. Muiz BANiREj IntroductionUpon being asked by the publishers of Critique_of_the_High_Court_Rules_Review_-_Latest-2s to be taken or further taken in such causes of matters" used in Order 1, Rule 1(2), particularly, with regard to the3 With regard to the last three words of Order 1 Rule 1(2) "causes of matters", It is believed that there is a typographical error in the use of the preposition "of". Contextually, t Critique_of_the_High_Court_Rules_Review_-_Latest-2he more reasonable word to be used is the word "or” to read "causes or matters".3requirement of pre-action protocol vis-à-vis causes or matters institCritique_of_the_High_Court_Rules_Review_-_Latest-2
uted before the commencement of the Rules but were yet to come up before the court. Here, it may be argued that since Order 1, Rule 1(2) of the Rules The Lagos State High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2012: Are We Near perfection?ByDr. Muiz BANiREj IntroductionUpon being asked by the publishers of Critique_of_the_High_Court_Rules_Review_-_Latest-2 matters, Claimants in matters that have not come up before the court ought to comply with the pre-action protocol.4 The question is: how will such compliance be done without first withdrawing the cause or matter? The alternative and, perhaps more reasonable, argument is since the matter had already Critique_of_the_High_Court_Rules_Review_-_Latest-2 been instituted, pre-action steps cannot logically apply. In order to eliminate the inherent confusion in Order 3, Rule 2(1), it is suggested that thCritique_of_the_High_Court_Rules_Review_-_Latest-2
e provision should be re-drafted thus:"All civil proceedings to be initiated by Writ of Summons after the commencement of these Rules shall be accompaThe Lagos State High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2012: Are We Near perfection?ByDr. Muiz BANiREj IntroductionUpon being asked by the publishers of Critique_of_the_High_Court_Rules_Review_-_Latest-2bpoena: and(d)copies of every document to be relied on at the trial;(e)Pre-action Protocol Form 01."* It Is worthy to note that upon the introduction of frontloading In the now defunct High Court of Lagos state (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2004, parties in pending litigation had to comply with the provi Critique_of_the_High_Court_Rules_Review_-_Latest-2sions of Order 3 Rule 2(1) of the 2004 Rules by filing the accompanying process, namely, list of witnesses, written statements on oath and copies of tCritique_of_the_High_Court_Rules_Review_-_Latest-2
he documents to be relied on at the trial. In this regard, it could naturally be said that in compliance with the combination of Order 1 Rule 1(2) andThe Lagos State High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2012: Are We Near perfection?ByDr. Muiz BANiREj IntroductionUpon being asked by the publishers of Critique_of_the_High_Court_Rules_Review_-_Latest-24Beyond that, it is notable that there is a fresh dichotomy in the instant Rules. While the Order 1, Rule 1(1) of 2004 Rules required pending matters to comply with the Rules "in respect of steps to be further taken", the 2012 Rules require compliance "in respect of steps to be taken or further take Critique_of_the_High_Court_Rules_Review_-_Latest-2n in such causes or matters".A case worthy of consideration in this regard is Alhaji Yomi Adigun & 2 Ors V. Abebe Ologbin & 5 Ors5, where the practicaCritique_of_the_High_Court_Rules_Review_-_Latest-2
l application of Order 1 Rule 1 of the 2004 Rules came up for determination. The case was commenced under the 1994 Rules and the Defendants' statementThe Lagos State High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2012: Are We Near perfection?ByDr. Muiz BANiREj IntroductionUpon being asked by the publishers of Critique_of_the_High_Court_Rules_Review_-_Latest-2 of Order 20 Rule 1 of the 1994 High Court Rules. However, upon the advent of the 2004 Rules, the Claimant on 20 June, 2005, filed his frontloaded processes while the Defendants, with the leave of court, filed her frontloaded defence on 21, April, 2006. On the 8th day of May, 2006, the Claimants fil Critique_of_the_High_Court_Rules_Review_-_Latest-2ed a Reply to the Statements of Defence of the first, second and fourth Defendants as of right and without the leave of the Court. It was against thisCritique_of_the_High_Court_Rules_Review_-_Latest-2
Reply filed by the Claimants that Counsel to the first, second and fourth Defendants had contended that it was improper on the ground that it was filThe Lagos State High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2012: Are We Near perfection?ByDr. Muiz BANiREj IntroductionUpon being asked by the publishers of Critique_of_the_High_Court_Rules_Review_-_Latest-2 Rules 2004 to the contention of the Claimant that the Reply was properlySuit No; 2324/1999, Abiru J, High Court of Lagos state,Gọi ngay
Chat zalo
Facebook