STOP SEEING INTRUSIVE ADS, & HAVE PREMIUM FEATURES? Stop seeing intrusive ads and have a smoother reading experience, once you sign up on Judicial Poetry. Sign up now!

FOR PUBLIC SERVANT, SUIT MUST COMMENCE WITHIN THREE MONTHS

Reach more audience. Place advert here.

Lautech v. Ogunwobi (2006) 4 NWLR (Pt. 971) 569, “any action, prosecution, or other proceeding commenced against any person for any act done in pursuance or intended execution of any Law or of any public duty or authority, or in respect of any alleged neglect or default in the execution of any such Law, duty or authority, the action, prosecution or proceeding shall not lie or be instituted unless it is commenced within three months next after the act, neglect or default complained of, or in case of continuance of damage or injury, within three months after the cessation thereof”.

This case was relied on in MATTHEW OYE OLUWOLE V. POWER HOLDING COMPANY OF NIGERIA PLC (2012).

Was this dictum helpful?

SHARE ON

limitation law

PROCEEDINGS AFTER LIMITATION PERIOD IS DEFECTIVE

Lautech v. Ogunwobi (2006) 4 NWLR (Pt. 971) 569, “When the statute of limitation in question prescribed a period within which an action must be brought, legal proceedings cannot be properly or validly instituted after the expiration of the prescribed period. Any such action instituted must be struck out as not being properly, before the Court.” This case was relied on in MR. EMMANUEL AKABOM ENEBONG & ANOR v. ETUBOM ALEX OTU EDEM & ORS (2016)

Was this dictum helpful?

NEGOTIATION DOES NOT STOP THE PERIOD OF LIMITATION FROM RUNNING

The learned trial Judge rightly conceded at page 31 of the Record, in her Ruling, that it is settled law that generally negotiation by the parties does not prevent or stop the period of limitation stipulated by a statute: from running. The law on this, as stated by the Supreme Court in JOHN EBOIGBE v....

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here

ACCEPTANCE OF LIABILITY WILL STOP PERIOD OF LIMITATION FROM RUNNING

It is also settled law that generally negotiation by the party does not prevent or stop the period of limitation stipulated by a statute from running. This however is subject to qualification that where there has been admission of liability during negotiation and all that remains is fulfillment of the agreement it can not be...

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here

FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT IN EQUITY – ENTRY TO LAND

Apart from fraudulent concealment of right of action which itself furnishes a cause of action, knowledge cannot be said to be relevant. In order to constitute such fraudulent concealment as would, in equity, take a case out of the law of limitation, it is not enough that there should be merely tortuous act unknown to...

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here

PURPOSE OF LIMITATION LAW

The object of the Limitation Law is to penalise claimants who slumber over the enforcement of their rights. – Ikyegh, JCA. SIFAX v. MIGFO (2015) Was this dictum helpful? Yes 0 No 0...

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here

LIMITATION LAW SHOULD BE GIVEN BENEFICIAL CONSTRUCTION

The Limitation Law and all laws of this description ought to receive beneficial construction. They should be construed liberally but not in such a way as to read into them words not intended by the law makers as the majority decision of the court below portrayed. All limitation laws have for their object the prevention...

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here

No more related dictum to show.