Conditions Precedent to Initiating an Action for Recovery of Legal Fee

CASE TITLE:  VAL OIL TRADING S. A. & ANOR v. AMARAN (2023) LPELR-61242(CA)

JUDGMENT DATE: 20TH JULY, 2023

PRACTICE AREA: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE

LEAD JUDGMENT: JOSEPH SHAGBAOR IKYEGH, J.C.A.

SUMMARY OF JUDGMENT:

INTRODUCTION:

This appeal borders on the recovery of legal fees.

FACTS:

The appeal is from a decision of the Federal High Court sitting in Lagos (the Trial Court) whereby it entered judgment on the undefended list for a claim of professional fees of the respondent, a legal practitioner, in the sum of US $297,500 against the appellants.

The respondent qua legal practitioner, had by his action on the undefended list claimed at the trial Court for an order that the appellants pay the sum of US$297,500 in respect of his professional services in arbitration proceedings in suit No. LMDC/09-17/279/WIA or in any other proceedings in accordance with the executed agreement between the parties dated July 19, 2017 for the sale agreement in respect of the vessel MT./Lona dated February 12, 2017 between the 2nd respondent and the 3rd defendant.

The Trial Court entered judgment on the undefended list as claimed in favour of the respondent against the appellants. The appellants were unhappy with the decision and filed a notice of appeal against it.

​The respondent filed a notice of preliminary objection urging that the notice of appeal be dismissed for being incompetent and invalid.

ISSUE(S) FOR DETERMINATION:

The appeal was determined on its merits.

DECISION/HELD:

The appeal was allowed.

RATIOS:

• COURT – JURISDICTION – Meaning and limits of the jurisdiction of Court
• PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – UNDEFENDED LIST PROCEDURE – Whether legal fees can be claimed under the undefended list procedure
• LEGAL PRACTITIONER – RECOVERY OF CHARGES BY LEGAL PRACTITIONERS – Preconditions a legal practitioner must fulfill before commencing an action to recover fees upon a bill of charges
• JURISDICTION – JURISDICTION OF THE FEDERAL HIGH COURT – Whether the Federal High Court has jurisdiction to determine legal practitioner/client relationship matter

To read the full judgment or similar judgments, subscribe to Prime or Primsol