CIVIL PROCEDURE — Consent Judgment — Interpretation by Court of Co-ordinate Jurisdiction — Not a Written Instrument

"The question is whether the consent judgment of 4-5-98 between the parties which was before the trial court for interpretation on the application of the appellants comes within the definition of 'written instrument' capable of being accommodated under the rule. The word 'instrument' is defined in Strouds Judicial Dictionary, as 'anything reduced to writing, a document of formal or solemn character.' However, whether anything reduced to writing is an instrument largely depends on the context in which it is used. For example the same Strouds Judicial Dictionary volume 3 at page 1386 stated plainly that 'orders of court were not instrument within Apportionment Act 1834.' One may find support in this observation by Stroud to say that a judgment of a Court of law can hardly be accommodated under the words 'other written instrument' under Rule 1 of Order 46 of the Lagos High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules 1994, under which the appellants filed their application for the interpretation of the consent judgment of 4-5-98. In other words a judgment of a Court of Law cannot be subjected to interpretation by a court of co-ordinate jurisdiction like a deed, a will or an instrument containing right and obligation of parties under order 46 Rule 1 of the Lagos High Court Civil Procedure Rules."