A.T. & E. CO. LTD. V. FED. MILITARY GOVT.

• Pages: 40-43

40



NIGERIAN SUPREME COURT CASES

[1969] N.S.C.C.

A.T. & E.

CO. LTD. V. FED.

MILITARY GOVT.



5

THE AUTOMATIC TELEPHONE



APPELLANTS

AND ELECTRIC COMPANY LTD.

V



10

THE FEDERAL MILITARY GOVERNMENT



RESPONDENT

OF THE REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA

SUIT NO. SC 143/1968

SUPREME COURT OF NIGERIA

ADEMOLA,



C.J.N.



15

LEWIS,



J.S.C.

MADARIKAN,



J.S.C.

31st January, 1969.

Civil Procedure - Procedure of Arbitration same as in High Court - Order 41



20

rules 4 to 10 of the Supreme Court (Civil Procedure) Rules - Held right of

reply to plaintiff if defendant at any stage puts in documents by consent or

otherwise.

ISSUE:



25

1. Who has the final right of reply in a case on Arbitration in accordance with Rule

8 of the Supreme Court (Civil Procedure) Rules ?

FACTS:

In an Arbitration conducted under the Arbitration Act (Cap.13) the claimant had

called witnesses and during the evidence of the witnesses the respondent/appel-



30

lants had tendered some exhibits in cross-examination and had earlier put in by

consent some documents as exhibits. At the close of the claimant's case, coun-

sel for the respondent/appellant indicated that he had called no witness and an

issue arose over the order of address. The Arbitrator in his ruling stated that the

Claimant had the right of reply. The matter was sent to the High Court for deter-



35

mination and it was decided that the Arbitrator was correct. The respondent/ap-

pellant appealed to the Supreme Court:

HELD:

1.

If the "other party' to the party beginning "at any time" reads documents or they

are taken as read by consent, then by virtue of Rule 8 the party beginning has



40

the right to the final reply irrespective of any earlier right that he may have to

sum up by virtue of Rule 4 which he may or may not have exercised.

2.

Consequently, the Chief Justice of Lagos was right in the opinion that he gave

to the arbitrator that the present Appellants ought to have addressed before the

present Respondent exercised the right of reply.



45

Chief Williams

(with him

Carew)

for Appellant.

Jinadu, Principal State Counsel,

(with him

Sanyaolu)

for Respondent.

LEWIS, J.S.C.

(Delivering the Judgment of the Court): The parties to this appeal



50

were the parties to an arbitration being conducted under the Arbitration Act

(Cap.13). The respondent, who was the claimant at the arbitration, had called

witnesses and during the evidence of those witnesses the present appellants, who

were the respondents at the arbitration, had tendered some documents in