Sample Draft in Support of a Motion Ex Parte in Garnishee Proceedings IN THE FEDERAL HIGH COURT OF NIGERIA IN THE ABUJA JUDICIAL DIVISION HOLDEN AT ABUJA SUIT NO.: suit number of the case BETWEEN Party 1…..……..………….. JUDGMENT CREDITOR /APPLICANT AND Party 2 ………… JUDGMENT DEBTOR/ RESPONDENT BETWEEN Party 1…..……..………….. JUDGMENT CREDITOR /APPLICANT AND Party 2 ………… JUDGMENT DEBTOR/ RESPONDENT AND 1. (Bank Name) 2. (Bank Name) 3. (Bank Name) 4 (Bank Name) 5. (Bank Name) 6. (Bank Name) – – – – -GARNISHEES 7. (Bank Name) 8. (Bank Name) 9. (Bank Name) 10. (Bank Name) 11. (Bank Name) AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF MOTION EXPARTE I, introduced, stating your name, gender, age, religion, address, and state: The certified true copy of the said judgment is annexed herewith and marked Exhibit A. The text in paragraphs 5a to 5e outlines the order for the payment of the judgment sum. 7. That I know as a fact that the post Judgment interest on the judgment sum which runs from the Day of Judgment until the liquidation of the said judgment was 10%. ________________ DEPONENT SWORN to at the Registry of the Federal High Court, Abuja. This…………… day of December, 2018
MOTION EXPARTE in Garnishee Proceedings
Below is a standard draft sample of a Motion Ex Parte in Garnishee Proceedings. Please note that the form can vary depending on jurisdiction and the specific court rules applicable, so it’s important to ensure compliance with local court procedure IN THE FEDERAL HIGH COURT OF NIGERIA IN THE ABUJA JUDICIAL DIVISION HOLDEN AT ABUJA SUIT NO.: suit number of the case BETWEEN Party 1…..……..…. JUDGMENT CREDITOR /APPLICANT AND Party 2 ………… JUDGMENT DEBTOR/ RESPONDENT AND 1. (Bank Name) 2. (Bank Name) 3. (Bank Name) 4 (Bank Name) 5. (Bank Name) 6. (Bank Name) – – – – -GARNISHEES 7. (Bank Name) 8. (Bank Name) 9. (Bank Name) 10. (Bank Name) 11. (Bank Name) MOTION EXPARTE FOR GARNISHEE ORDER PURSUANT TO SECTION 83(1) And 85 OF THE SHERIFFS AND CIVIL PROCESS ACT, CAP S6 LFN 2004 AND ORDER 37, RULE 1 & 2 OF THE FEDERAL HIGH COURT (CIVIL PROCEDURE) RULES,2009. TAKE NOTICE that this Honorable Court will be moved on the _________ day of ______________ 2018 at the hour of 9’O Clock in the forenoon or so soon thereafter as counsel may be heard on behalf of the Judgment-Creditor, praying this court for the following reliefs:A GARNISHEE ORDER NISI that all sum standing to the credit of the Judgment-Debtor in the account(s) of the judgment debtor with the Garnishees and/or all debts due or accruing from the above-mentioned Garnishees to the Judgment-Debtor or so much thereof as may be sufficient to satisfy the judgment debt or any amount remaining unpaid on the Judgment debt entered in this suit, being the sum of N15,896,209.42 (Fifteen Million, Eight Hundred and Ninety-Six Thousand, Two Hundred and Nine Naira, Forty-Two Kobo) be attached in satisfaction of the judgment debt subsisting in favor of the Judgment Creditor. AN ORDER directing the Garnishees herein to prepare and file on oath before this Honorable Court, a Statement of Account showing the Judgment-Debtor’s financial status with them up to the date immediately before the filing of the said Statement of Account(s). Dated this—– day of Month, year Lawyer’s Name/Representation. Suites —————————— —————————— ———————————-. ———————————– Lawyer’s mail address
BETWEEN: SC/ CV/1130/2023
AND IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NIGERIAHOLDEN AT ABUJAON FRIDAY, 22ND DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023BEFORE THEIR LORDSHIPS1. JOHN INYANG OKORO2. MOHAMMED LAWAL GARBA3. HELEN MORONKEJI OGUNWUMIJU4. TIJJANI ABUBAKAR5. EMMANUEL AKOMAYE AGIM JUDGMENT: (DELIVERED BY HELEN MORONKEJI OGUNWUMIJU, JSC) I have read in draft the judgment just delivered by my learned brother MOHAMMED LAWAL GARBA, JSC and I agree with his Lordship’s reasoning and ultimate conclusion that the appeal lacks merit and should be dismissed. I will add a few words for emphasis. This is an appeal against the judgment of the Court of Appeal, sitting in Lagos Division delivered on Thursday, 10th November, 2023 in respect of an appeal emanating from the decision of the Governorship Election Petition Tribunal sitting in Enugu State. The rulings and final judgment of the said Court of Appeal can be found in pages 3028-3091 of Vol.3 of the Record of Appeal.SC.CV.1130.2023HELEN MORONKED OGUNWUMIA, ISC The Appellants who felt aggrieved have appealed to this Honorable Court against those findings, rulings, conclusions and ultimate orders made against them in the judgment of the lower court.The facts which led to this appeal are as follows:The 1st Respondent herein conducted election to the office of the Governor of Enugu State on 18th March, 2023 and at the close of the polls, the 2nd Respondent, who was sponsored by the 3rd Respondent, was duly returned as the winner of the election by the 1st Respondent. The Appellants had scored 152, 778 votes whereas the 2d Respondent had scored 157, 997 votes. Not satisfied by the 2nd Respondent’s return, the Appellants, filed a petition at the trial Tribunal for the sole relief of being returned as winner of the election. The grounds of the petition ranged from non-qualification premised on an allegation of submission of forged National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) certificate to the 1st Respondent to various electoral malpractices including falsification of results and over-voting. The Appellants as petitioners filed an Election Petition before the Tribunal, challenging the election of the 2nd Respondent on three (3) Grounds. In proof of their case, the Appellants called 30 witnesses and tendered several documents, while the 1st Respondent did not call evidence. The 2nd Respondent called two (2) witnesses, and the 3rd Respondent called one (1) witness.In proof of Ground 1 of the Petition, the Appellants called PW 1, PW 2, PW 3 (all witnesses on subpoena issued by the Tribunal), PW 26 and PW 30 (the latter also a witness on subpoena). PW 1 was the Director Corps Certification of the National Youth Service Corps (NYSC, who tendered Exhibit EPT01/08A (ietter by OMAS & Partners dated 23/11/2022). See the written statement on oath of PW 1 on pages 1510-1518 of Vol. 11 of the ROA, while his identification and tendering of documentary evidence and cross examination can be found on pages 2149-2151 of Vol. III of the ROA. PW 2 a private legal practitioner, had written to the NYSC pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act, 2011 (letter admitted as Exhibit EPT01/12A) to enquire and know whether the 2d Respondent’s so called NYSC discharge certificate was issued by it (Exhibit EPT01/12B). She also tendered, the Form EC9 9 (together with its attachments, including the allegedly forged NYSC Discharge Certificate and the certification receipt), admitted and marked as Exhibits EPT01/11A, B and C. See her Statement on Oath on pages 1534A-1534H of Vol.II of the ROA, while her tendering of documents and her cross-examination can be found on pages 2151-2155 of Vol. II of the ROA. PW 3, a staff of INEC, was subpoenaed and he gave oral evidence on oath that. the 2nd Respondent actually presented to INEC his Form EC9 (Exhibit EPT01/15)along with the allegedly forged NYSC discharge certificate. The Tribunal, in its final judgment, expunged the evidence of PW 1, PW 2, PW 3, PW 26 and PW 30 and held that the testimonies of the other witnesses as well as the documents tendered by the Appellants were not sufficient for the Appellants to be entitled to Judgment of the Tribunal. Dissatisfied with the Judgment of the Tribunal, the Appellants appealed to the Court of Appeal on sixteen grounds of Appeal, vide a notice of appeal filed on 2nd October,2023. The lower court on the 10th November, 2023 delivered its judgment,Thunal, The Appelants are dissatsted with the pud ment of the court ofAppeal; hence this Appeal. Learned Appellant’s counsel in the brief settled by Michael Jonathan Numa,SAN distilled 4 issues for determination set out below: 1. Was the lower court right in affirming the trial Tribunal’s decision in expunging from its record and refusing to assess the evidence of PW 1, PW 2, PW 3, PW 26 and PW 30 together with all the Exhibits they tendered? (Grounds 2, 3 and 4 of the Notice of Appeal)2. Was the lower court right in holding that the 2rd Respondent was qualified to contest or was not qualified by the provisions of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 as amended from contesting the Governorship Election held in Enugu State on 18th March, 2023? (Ground 5 of the Notice of Appeal)3. Was the lower court right in affirming the trial Tribunal’s assessment of the evidence of the witnesses called by the Appellants and the documentary evidence tendered by them on the one hand; and the totality of the evidence called by the parties on the other hand? (Grounds 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 12 of the Notice of Appeal)4. Was the lower court right when it refused to strike out the respective Briefs of Arguments of the 2nd and 3rd Respondents and when it discountenanced the Appellants’ Reply Briefs?(Grounds 1 and 11 of the Notice of Appeal)In the 1st Respondent’s brief settled by Abdul Mohammed, SAN, the 15t Respondent’s Counsel identified three issues for determination as set out below:. Was the lower court right in affirming the trial tribunal’s decision in expunging from its record and refusing to assess the evidence of PW 1, PW 2, PW
Corporate Law Practice
JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY EMMANUEL AKOMAYE AGIM, JSC -SC/CV/ 1130/2023
EDEOGA CHIJIOKE JONATHAN
LABOUR PARTY
AND
INDEPENDENT NATIONAL ELECTORAL COMMISSION
MBAH PETER NDUBUISI
PEOPLE’S DEMOCRATIC PARTY