Justice Wada Abubakar Omar of a Kano State High Court has dismissed the application of three tobacco companies challenging, among other issues, the jurisdiction of the court to entertain a suit filed against them by the Attorney-General of the state.
The International Tobacco Limited; British American Tobacco Plc and British American Tobacco Investment Limited refered to as the 2nd, 3rd and 4th defendants respectively had, in separate notices of preliminary objections challenged the jurisdiction of the court and prayed for an order setting aside the writ of summons served on them on the ground that they were defective.
The 2nd defendant hinged its objection on the failure of the plaintiff to obtain leave of the court prior to the writ of summons, non-compliance with the provisions of Sections 98 and 99 of the Sheriffs and Civil Process Act Cap S 6 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004 and non-compliance with the provisions of Order 5 Rule 14 of the High Court of Kano State (Civil Procedure Rules 1988.
BAT argued that the plaintiff erroneously relied upon Order 12 Rule 21 of the Kano State (Civil Procedure Rules 1988 which it claimed is inapplicable.But for the BAT Investment Limited, the order should be set aside because the Order granting leave to serve it the writ of summons was wrongly granted.In his ruling, a copy of which was obtained by our correspondent in Kano yesterday, Justice Abubakar Omar dismissed all the application of the defendants.He said, “The application of the 2nd defendant as contained in its notice of preliminary objection is devoid of any merit and same is hereby dismissed.The 3rd defendant’s application fails and is hereby dismissed.
With the resolution of all the six issues for determination against the 4th defendant/applicant, the entire application of the 4th defendant/applicant fails and it is hereby dismissed.”
The International Tobacco Limited; British American Tobacco Plc and British American Tobacco Investment Limited refered to as the 2nd, 3rd and 4th defendants respectively had, in separate notices of preliminary objections challenged the jurisdiction of the court and prayed for an order setting aside the writ of summons served on them on the ground that they were defective.
The 2nd defendant hinged its objection on the failure of the plaintiff to obtain leave of the court prior to the writ of summons, non-compliance with the provisions of Sections 98 and 99 of the Sheriffs and Civil Process Act Cap S 6 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004 and non-compliance with the provisions of Order 5 Rule 14 of the High Court of Kano State (Civil Procedure Rules 1988.
BAT argued that the plaintiff erroneously relied upon Order 12 Rule 21 of the Kano State (Civil Procedure Rules 1988 which it claimed is inapplicable.But for the BAT Investment Limited, the order should be set aside because the Order granting leave to serve it the writ of summons was wrongly granted.In his ruling, a copy of which was obtained by our correspondent in Kano yesterday, Justice Abubakar Omar dismissed all the application of the defendants.He said, “The application of the 2nd defendant as contained in its notice of preliminary objection is devoid of any merit and same is hereby dismissed.The 3rd defendant’s application fails and is hereby dismissed.
With the resolution of all the six issues for determination against the 4th defendant/applicant, the entire application of the 4th defendant/applicant fails and it is hereby dismissed.”
SOURCE
