Gerhard Huebner Vs. Aeronautical Industrial Engineering And Project Management Co. Ltd (Aiep/dana) (2017)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report

PAUL ADAMU GALINJE J.S.C.

The Appellant herein was the plaintiff at the Kaduna State High Court (hereinafter to be referred to as the trial Court). At paragraph 19 of his statement of claim dated 17th of May, 1995 and filed on the 24th of October, 1996, the appellant claimed against the Respondent, the following reliefs:-

i) A declaration that the Defendant holds the legal estate in the land at Kajuru bought by the plaintiff in its name upon a resultant trust to the benefit of the plaintiff.

ii) A declaration that the defendant is consequently obliged to comply with the instructions of the plaintiff in respect of the transfer of the legal estate in the said land.

iii) A declaration that the issue of certificate of occupancy in favour of the defendant in respect of the land does not affect the position of the defendant as Trustee nor that of the plaintiff as beneficiary of the legal estate.

iv) An injunction compelling the defendant to comply with the plaintiff’s instruction concerning the transfer of the legal estate in the said land to Kajuru Nigeria Ltd.

v) Alternatively to

1

(i) above a declaration that the receipts applications and certificates of occupancy issued in the name of the defendant are null and void being instruments issued pursuant to and based upon an illegal, void and or voidable transaction/arrangement.

vi) A perpetual injunction restraining the defendant from interfering with the interest of the plaintiff and possession of the said land.”

The Respondent denied the claims as enumerated above and stated that they were frivolous, vexatious and constituted an abuse of Court processes and should be dismissed. Issues having been joined between the parties, the case proceeded to trial. At the end of the trial which spanned slightly over 6 years and in a reserved and considered judgment delivered on the 5th of November, 2002, the appellant’s claims were dismissed in its entirety for lack of merit. The Appellant’s appeal to the Court of Appeal was equally dismissed on the 11th May, 2006.

The appeal herein is against the decision of the Court of Appeal (henceforth to be referred to as the lower Court). The notice of appeal at page 703 of the printed record of this appeal dated and filed on the 12th of May, 2006

2

contains three grounds of appeal.