GLOBAL WEST VESSEL SPECIALIST NIGERIA LIMITED v. NIGERIA NLG LIMITED & ANOR

The facts of this case are as follows: The 1st respondent was the plaintiff at the trial Court. It had commenced an action by an originating Summons before the Federal High Court in suit No.FHC/C/L/CS/847/2013. The said Summons was filed along with an affidavit dated 17th June, 2013 against the 2nd respondent and the appellant(hereinafter referred to as AGF) and Global West respectively, as the 1st and 2nd defendants. The Plaintiff had then sought the Interpretation of the followings:
1. Nigeria LNG Act;
2. The Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA) Act;
3. The Coastal and Inland Shipping (Cabotage) Act, Cap. C51 LFN, 2004;
4. The Marine Environmental (Sea Protection Levy) Regulations, 2012 and;
5. The Merchant Shipping (Ship Generated Marine Waste Reception Facilities) Regulations, 2012.
The plaintiff also challenged the blockage of its vessels and the prevention of same from accessing the Bonny Channel by a vessel with men in Military uniform on board, identified as representatives of Global West etc.
The plaintiff further filed a Motion exparte along with a Notice of Motion dated 17th June, 2013 seeking various interim and interlocutory injunctive reliefs respectively against the Federal Government of Nigeria and its agents and Global West. The trial Court on 18th June, 2013 granted all the interim reliefs sought.
The 2nd defendant – Global West filed a Notice of Preliminary Objection dated 24th June, 2013, challenging the jurisdiction of the trial Court to entertain the suit on grounds of misjoinder and non-joinder of a necessary party and consequently sought an order of the trial Court to strike out the suit for lack of jurisdiction and or strike out its name from the suit for mis joinder. Global West also filed an application praying the trial Court to discharge the order of interim injunction earlier made against it.
The trial Court on Friday 12th July, 2013 dismissed the 2nd defendant’s Preliminary Objection together with the application seeking to discharge the Order of interim injunction granted against it.
2nd defendant was dissatisfied with the ruling of the trial Federal High Court, hence it appealed by the Notice of Appeal dated 23rd July, 2013 to the Court below.
By a notice of Preliminary Objection, dated 28th March, 2014, the plaintiff now 1st respondent objected to the competence of the aforementioned Notice of Appeal on the grounds, inter-alia, that – leave of the trial Court or of the Court below was not sought and obtained before the said Notice of Appeal was filed in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 as amended.
On 18th June, 2014, the Court below heard the substantive appeal along with arguments on the Preliminary Objection and in its considered judgment delivered on 11th August upheld the said objection to the effect that the Notice of Appeal filed by the appellant was incompetent having been filed without leave of either the trial Court or of the Court below. The Court below consequently struck out the Notice of Appeal and thereby affirmed the ruling of the trial Court.
Further dissatisfied with the judgment of the Court below, led to the instant appeal on eight grounds vide the Notice of Appeal filed on 22nd August, 2014.
The appellant and 1st respondent filed and exchanged briefs of argument.
Appellant’s brief of argument filed on 8th April, 2015 was deemed properly filed and served on 15th March, 2016. The 1st respondent filed its brief of argument within time on 19th April, 2016. It is noteworthy that the 2nd respondent – Attorney General of the Federation did not file any brief of argument or any other process in this appeal.
When this appeal came up for hearing on 24th October, 2016, both the 1st and 2nd respondents were represented by counsel but there was no legal representation for the appellant. Upon enquiry, the Court was duly informed that there was proof of service of hearing notice to the counsel for the appellant. Appellant having duly filed and served its brief of argument,

…………………….B…………………….