DOHERTY & ANOR V. DOHERTY

• Pages: 213-215

DOHERTY & ANOR V. DOHERTY



213

DOHERTY & ANOR V. DOHERTY

5

1.

THEOPHILUS ADEBAYO DOHERTY

2.

HENRY ADE DOHERTY



APPELLANTS

10



V

RICHARD ADE DOHERTY



RESPONDENT

SUIT NO. SC 219/1964

SUPREME COURT OF NIGERIA

BRETT,



J.S.C.

15



COKER,



J.S.C.

IDIGBE,



J.S.C.

5th October, 1964

Legislation - Supreme Court Rules, .1961 Order 7, R.17(1),(4).

20

Civil Appeals - Appeal dismissed for non-compliance - Application to restore

appeal.

ISSUE:

25



1. Whether a party should be allowed to suffer for his solicitor's negligence.

FACTS:

The appellants' solicitors, though served with notice to appear, did not attend

before the Registrar, and took no sl:eps to fulfil the conditions by him imposed;

and the appeal was dismissed for ion-compliance, under R.17(1) of 0.7 of the

30



Supreme Court Rules, 1961. The appellants, who had not been served with no-

tice to appear before the Registrar, applied under R.17(4) for the appeal to be re-

stored, the respondent objected, but did not show that he would be so prejudiced

as to make it inequitable if the appeal was restored. After the appeal was dis-

missed, the respondent withdrew his cross-appeal from the stay of the order ap-

35



pealed from.

HELD:

The appellants could not be held responsible for their solicitors' failure to com-

ply with the conditions imposed by the Registrar, and the appeal would be re-

stored.

40

°BITER:

Restoring the appeal would not of itself resuscitate the stay, and it would rest

with the parties to seek advice on what steps to take.

CASES REFERRED TO IN JUDGMENT:

45



1.

Grimshaw v. Dunbar

(1953) 1 All E.R. 350. (1953) 1 Q.B. 408.

2.

Ugwu v. Aba & Ors

(1961) All N.L.R. 438.

Chief O.B. Akin-Olugbade,

for the appellants.

G.L. lmpey

(with him

Miss Rose Taylor)

for the respondent.

50

COKER, J.S.C.

(Delivering the Judgment of the Court): This is an application

by the Defendants/Appellants for the restoration of their appeal pursuant to the

provisions of Order 7 Rule 17(4) F.S.C. Rules. It appears by the affidavit in support

of the motion that although the appellants' solicitors were served with summons in