LEGAL PRINCIPLE: EQUITY & TRUSTS – Discretionary Remedies – Party in Contempt Not Entitled to Equitable Relief
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
A person who is in contempt of a subsisting court order is not entitled to the court's discretion to enable him to continue with the breach. As long as the contempt continues, the court will not exercise its discretionary powers in his favour.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Wali, JSC, in Lawal-Osula v. Osula (1995) NLC-661993(SC) at p. 10; Paras A–C.
"A person who is in contempt of a subsisting court order is not entitled to be granted court's discretion to enable him continue with the breach. As long as the applicants continue in their contempt of disobeying the orders contained in the judgment of the Court of Appeal, this court will not exercise its discretionary powers in their favour."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Discretionary remedies are not available to contemnors. The court will not aid a party in continuing disobedience. The principle applies to all discretionary relief. The applicant must first comply with the order or purge the contempt. The rule protects the authority of the court. The party cannot benefit from his own wrongdoing. The court will examine whether the contempt is continuing. The principle is well-established in equity. The court will refuse relief until the contempt is resolved. The rule promotes respect for court orders.