In a judgment of the High Court delivered on the 24th February, 1969, the defendants/respondents were, inter alia, ordered to file an account of all proceeds received as rents from landed properties of one Solomon Ajibola (deceased), but they failed to do so. They were, however, given extension of time within which to file the said account but they again failed to comply.

The plaintiffs/applicants thereupon brought an Application for an Order for the defendants/respondents to show cause why they should not be committed to prison for refusal to comply with the Order of Court.

Counsel for the defendants/respondents contended that since an appeal was pending in the Supreme Court, any further Application in the matter ought to be brought in the Supreme Court. Counsel for the plaintiffs/applicants argued that as long as no stay of execution had been ordered, the plaintiffs/applicants were entitled to bring this Application which was tantamount to an enforcement of the judgment.

HELD:

(1)     The plaintiffs/applicants contention was well founded and it was still open to the defendants/respondents to take whatever steps they deem fit either in the High Court or in the Supreme Court to stay the execution of the judgment.

(2)     However, the plaintiffs/applicants were obliged under order 52, rule 2(2) of the Supreme Court Rules of England to file along with this application for leave, a statement setting out the names and description of the applicants, the names description and addresses of the persons sought to be committed and the grounds on which their committal was sought; they were also to file an affidavit before this Application was made, verifying the facts relied upon. In so far as they had failed to do so the Application was defective and must be struck out.

Application struck out.

Rules and Orders referred to:

Supreme Court Rules (England) Order 52, rule 2(2).

APPLICATION FOR COMMITTAL TO PRISON

Somade, for the Plaintiffs/Applicants.

Emeshine, for the Defendants/Respondents.

Kazeem, J.:-This is an application for an order for the defendant/respondents to show cause why they should not be committed to prison for refusal or neglect to comply with the Order of Court made on 24th February, 1969.

Although the application was made ex parte, the defendants/respondents were represented by Counsel who was allowed to address the court.

The facts briefly are that in a judgment of this Court delivered on 24th February, 1969, the defendants/respondents were, inter alia, ordered to file an account of all proceeds received as rents from landed properties of one Solomon Ajibola Phillips (deceased), but they failed to do so. They were, however, given nine months' extension of time on 23rd June, 1969, within which to file the said account but again they have not yet done so.

Learned Counsel for the defendants/respondents contended that in so far as they have appealed against the judgment and that the appeal is now pending in the Supreme Court, any further application in the matter ought to be brought in Supreme Court. He, however, agreed that no stay of execution has been ordered in the matter. Learned Counsel for the plaintiffs/applicants, however, argued that as long as no stay of execution has been ordered, the plaintiff/applicants are entitled to bring this application which is tantamount to an enforcement of the judgment.

I think the plaintiffs/applicants' contention is well founded and it is still open to the defendant/respondents to take whatever steps they deem fit either in this Court or in the Supreme Court to stay the execution of the judgment. However, the plaintiffs/applicants are obliged under Order 52, rule 2(2) of the Supreme Court Rules of England (which is applicable to this matter) to file along with this application for leave, a statement setting out the names and addresses of the persons sought to be committed and the grounds on which their committal is sought; they are also to file an affidavit before this application was made, verifying the facts relied upon. In so far as they have failed to do so, this application is defective and it is hereby struck out. There will be no Order as to cost.