(SPDC) to pay N122 billon as damages to Ejamah-Ebubu community in Eleme Local Government .. FROM INSIDE ELEME NEWSPAPER
Oil Spill: Court Orders Shell To Pay N122b To Ejamah
By Godwin Stephen
The Court of Appeal sitting in Port Harcourt has ordered Shell Petroleum Development Company (SPDC) to pay N122 billon as damages to Ejamah-Ebubu community in Eleme Local Government Area for crude oil spillage that devastated the community.
Justice Ali Abubakar Gumel who heard the appeal filed by Shell dismissed it for the oil company's failure to file a competent brief of argument to support her suit.
Shell had in suit No.CA/PH/396/
The Ejamah-Ebubu chiefs had in suit FHC/PHC/CS/231/
First Bank had on December17, 2012 guaranteed the payment of N1,772,460,585.
The bank had guaranteed to pay the Ejamah-Ebubu community the aforementioned sums and accruable interest which now amount to N122 billion, if Shell's appeal fails. And dissatisfied with the judgment, Shell had filed 19 grounds of appeal seeking to set aside the judgment.
The counsel to Shell, Mr. Olawale Akoni (SAN), argued that Shell was not given fair hearing. But counsel to the Ejamah-Ebubu community, Lucius Nwosu (SAN), said Shell did not call witnesses at the trial, hence, had admitted the claim of his clients.
Delivering the lead judgment on the appeal, Justice Gumel, said the notice of preliminary objection brought by the community was duly argued on behalf of the parties. He observed that Nwosu had noted that Shell never sought for or obtained any leave to amend their brief of argument, contrary to Shell's counsel's claim.
Citing order 19 rules 2 and 10 (1) of the Court of Appeals Rules, 2016, Justice Gumel dismissed Shell's appeal for failure to file competent brief or arguments to support or proffer arguments in it. According to him, there was no application of the appellants where a prayer was made for leave to amend their already filed brief or for extension of time to file their original brief out of time.
He explained that in the absence of any clear or proper order of the Appeal Court sought and duly obtained, the amended appellants' brief sought to be relied on by them to prosecute the appeal was not fully and duly regularized; and as such it was not a proper or valid process
before the court and therefore it ought to be discarded. According to him, it was more or less as if the appeal was never filed by Shell.
By Godwin Stephen
The Court of Appeal sitting in Port Harcourt has ordered Shell Petroleum Development Company (SPDC) to pay N122 billon as damages to Ejamah-Ebubu community in Eleme Local Government Area for crude oil spillage that devastated the community.
Justice Ali Abubakar Gumel who heard the appeal filed by Shell dismissed it for the oil company's failure to file a competent brief of argument to support her suit.
Shell had in suit No.CA/PH/396/
The Ejamah-Ebubu chiefs had in suit FHC/PHC/CS/231/
First Bank had on December17, 2012 guaranteed the payment of N1,772,460,585.
The bank had guaranteed to pay the Ejamah-Ebubu community the aforementioned sums and accruable interest which now amount to N122 billion, if Shell's appeal fails. And dissatisfied with the judgment, Shell had filed 19 grounds of appeal seeking to set aside the judgment.
The counsel to Shell, Mr. Olawale Akoni (SAN), argued that Shell was not given fair hearing. But counsel to the Ejamah-Ebubu community, Lucius Nwosu (SAN), said Shell did not call witnesses at the trial, hence, had admitted the claim of his clients.
Delivering the lead judgment on the appeal, Justice Gumel, said the notice of preliminary objection brought by the community was duly argued on behalf of the parties. He observed that Nwosu had noted that Shell never sought for or obtained any leave to amend their brief of argument, contrary to Shell's counsel's claim.
Citing order 19 rules 2 and 10 (1) of the Court of Appeals Rules, 2016, Justice Gumel dismissed Shell's appeal for failure to file competent brief or arguments to support or proffer arguments in it. According to him, there was no application of the appellants where a prayer was made for leave to amend their already filed brief or for extension of time to file their original brief out of time.
He explained that in the absence of any clear or proper order of the Appeal Court sought and duly obtained, the amended appellants' brief sought to be relied on by them to prosecute the appeal was not fully and duly regularized; and as such it was not a proper or valid process
before the court and therefore it ought to be discarded. According to him, it was more or less as if the appeal was never filed by Shell.
Comments
Post a Comment