FINAL JUDGMENT OR ORDER OF COURT

• Date: 06 February 2019

(1) "The said order made by the learned trial Judge did not determine or specify the exact amount which the respondent should pay to the 1st appellant. The respondent was only ordered to pay the total debt (which was not determined by the lower Court) including interest and other charges up to 25th October 1989, excluding payments made by the respondent up to date. The interest and other charges on the debt and the amount of the payments made by the respondent up to date were not determined by the learned trial Judge. To say the least, the order of the learned trial Judge was too vague, wide and inconclusive and was capable of causing considerable confusion and further litigation. It did not put an end to the proceedings before him. A final Judgment is, according to Jowitt’s Dictionary of English Law. 2nd ed., Vol.1, p. 1026, one which puts an end to the action by declaring that the plaintiff has or has not entitled himself to the remedy he sued for, so that nothing remains to be done but to execute the Judgment. The aforesaid order of the learned trial Judge cannot, in law, be sustained. It was too wide, vague, and inconclusive." - Per Adio, J.C.A. in U.B.N. v. Penny-Mart Ltd. Suit No. CA/B/253/90; (1992) 5 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 240) 228 at 242.

(2) "In Chief Sodipo v. Lemminkainen OY and Anor. (1985) 2 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 8) 547, the Supreme Court defined a final judgment as a judgment obtained in an action by which a previous existing liability of the defendant to the plaintiff is ascertained and established or where the question whether there was a pre-existing right of the plaintiff against the defendant is finally determined in favour of either the plaintiff or the defendant. See also Ezenwa v. Kareem (1990) 3 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 138) 258. In Akinsanya v. United Bank for Africa Limited (1986) 4 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 35) 273 the Supreme Court held that an order of Court is final if the Court orders something to be done according to the answer to the enquiries, without any further reference to itself. In Okokhue v. Obadan and Others (1989) 5 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 120) 185, the Court of Appeal held as follows: - (a) If the Court orders something to be done according to the answer to the enquiries, without any further reference to itself, the judgment is final. See also Akinsanya v. United Bank for Africa Limited, (supra). (b)No order, judgment or other proceeding can be final which does not affect the status of the parties for whichever side the decision is given; so that, if it is given for the plaintiff, it is conclusive against the defendant and if it is given for the defendant it is conclusive against the defendant. (c) A decision between the parties can only be regarded as final when a determination of the Court disposes of the rights of the parties and not merely an issue in the case. See also Ideh v. Godbless Motors (Nig.) Ltd. supra, Afolabi v. Igunbor and Another (1992) 8 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 257) 115. (d) A decision or judgment becomes final only when the merits of the case has been determined. In Ayu v. Madugu (1991) 2 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 171) 92, the Court of Appeal held that a final order or decision ends the dispute between the parties over a specific subject matter or and permanently sets it at rest in the Court which pronounced it. It terminates the litigation on merit and leaves nothing for the Court to do but execute...