LEGAL PRINCIPLE: CIVIL PROCEDURE – Pleadings – Amendment of Pleadings – Amendment Seeking to Deprive Party of Vested Right
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
In nullifying the joinder, the Court of Appeal (England) quoted with approval the dictum of Greer L. J. in Mabro v. Eagle Star & British Dominions Insurance Co. (1932) 1 K.B. 485, 489 that: 'It has been accepted practice for a long time that the amendment which would deprive a party of a vested right ought not be allowed.'
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Onu, JSC, in Kode v. Yussuf (2001) NLC-2391993(SC) at p. 18; Paras A–B.
"In nullifying the joinder, the Court of Appeal (England) quoted with approval the dictum of Greer L. J. in Mabro v. Eagle Star & British Dominions Insurance Co. (1932) 1 K.B. 485, 489 that: 'It has been accepted practice for a long time that the amendment which would deprive a party of a vested right ought not be allowed.'"
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
An amendment that would deprive a party of a vested right will not be allowed. Vested rights include rights acquired under a judgment, settlement, or statutory provision. The principle protects parties from losing rights they have already obtained through litigation or agreement. The court will not permit amendment to defeat such rights. The amendment must be sought before rights vest. After judgment, a party has a vested right to the benefit of the judgment. Amendment cannot take that away. The principle ensures finality and prevents abuse. The applicant cannot use amendment to overturn an adverse decision or escape liability. The court examines whether the proposed amendment would divest a vested right.
