A new ruling by the Supreme Court has actually entered favour of Guaranty Trust Bank concerning its case with Innoson Motors Nigeria Limited.

According to Punch, the ruling by the Supreme Court came after it reversed its earlier decision which dismissed an appeal by GTB against a N2.4 bn judgment given in favour of Innoson Motors Nigeria Limited by the Court of Appeal in Ibadan, Oyo State.

A senior authorities of GTB, who confirmed this to The PUNCH on Sunday, stated, “Yes, the Supreme court ruled in favour of GTbank on Friday.”

A judgment provided on Friday by a five-member panel, led by Justice Olukayode Ariwoola, held all that the Supreme Court erred when, in a judgment on February 27, 2019, it mistakenly dismissed the appeal marked: SC/694/2014 filed by GTB.

In the lead judgment, composed by Justice Tijani Abubakar, but continue reading Friday by Justice Abdu Aboki, the court held that it was misled by its Registry, which failed to promptly give the notice of the panel that it sat on the case on February 27, 2019, which GTB had actually already submitted its appellant’s brief of argument.

The judgment was on an application by GTB seeking the re-listing of the appeal on the grounds that it was mistakenly dismissed.

The Supreme Court stated the panel that rested on the case on February 27, 2019, being informed of the existence of the appellant’s quick of argument, would not have actually given the judgment which dismissed GTB’s appeal on grounds of absence of thorough prosecution.

Relying on Order 8 Rules 16 of the Supreme Court’s Rules, Justice Abubakar, in the lead judgment, held that the peak court has the power to reserve its decision in certain scenarios, like any other court.

He included that such situations include where there is any reason to do so, such as where any of the parties gotten judgment by deceit, fraud or default; where such a decision is a nullity or where it is apparent that the court was misguided into offering a decision.

Justice Tijani held that the circumstances of the GTB case fall into the category of the rare cases where the Supreme Court could modify or change its own order on the grounds that the stated order or judgment did not present what it intended to tape-record.

“I am encouraged that at the product time that the appellant’s appeal was inadvertently dismissed by this court, there remained in location, a valid and subsisting brief of argument submitted by the candidate.

“It will be unjustified to go to the sin of the court’s Registry on an innocent, alert, proactive and thorough litigant.

“It is obvious from the material before us, that there were mistakes committed by the Registry of this court, having actually stopped working to bring to the notification of the panel of Justices that beinged in chambers on the 27th February 2019 that the appellant had certainly filed its brief of argument.

“This is a case deserving of favorable factor to consider by this court.

“Having gone through all the products in this application, therefore, I am satisfied that the appellant/applicant’s brief of argument was filed before the order of this court made on the 27th of February 2019 dismissing the candidate’s appeal.

“The order dismissing the appeal was therefore made in error. It ought not to have been made if all products were revealed. The application is, therefore, meritorious and thus succeeds,” Justice Abubakar stated.

He proceeded to reserve the court’s ruling of February 27, 2019, dismissing GTB’s appeal and purchased that the appeal significant 694/2014 “be relisted to constitute an important part of business of the court up until its hearing and decision on the benefit.”

Other members of the panel– Justices Ariwoola, John Okoro, Helen Ogunwumiju, Aboki– agreed with the lead judgment.

ToriNG