LEGAL PRINCIPLE: CIVIL PROCEDURE – Execution Against Immovable Property – Requirement of Application on Notice
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
An ex parte motion is inappropriate where the interests of the other party will be adversely affected, except in cases of extreme urgency and for a limited period only. Justice demands that both sides be heard before an order adversely affecting rights is made.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Ogundare, JSC, in Leedo Presidential Motel Ltd v. Bank of the North Ltd (1998) NLC-411992(SC) at pp. 28–29; Paras C–A.
"I think the learned Justice is right... I should myself think that an ex parte motion is inappropriate where the interests of the other party will be adversely affected except in a case of extreme urgency and for a limited period only. Justice demands that both sides are heard or given an opportunity to be heard before an order adversely affecting the rights and obligation of one of them is made."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Execution against immovable property requires notice to the judgment debtor. Ex parte orders are only permissible in urgent cases. The principle protects the right to be heard. The court must balance urgency with fairness. The rule applies to execution proceedings. The judgment debtor is entitled to oppose the application. The principle is rooted in natural justice.