Enforcement of Foreign Judgments 2021

LEGISLATION 

Treaties 

1 Is your country party to any bilateral or multilateral treaties  for the reciprocal recognition and enforcement of foreign  judgments? What is the country’s approach to entering into  these treaties, and what, if any, amendments or reservations  has your country made to such treaties? 

At present, Nigeria is not a signatory to any multilateral or bilateral  treaties for the reciprocal recognition and enforcement of foreign  judgments. Foreign judgments are enforced in Nigeria by virtue of the  Foreign Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act, Chapter F35, Laws  of the Federation of Nigeria 2004 (the 2004 Act) and the Reciprocal  Enforcement of Judgments Act 1922, Chapter 175, Laws of the Federation  and Lagos 1958 (the 1958 Act). Section 3, Part 1 of the 2004 Act (which  contains provisions for the registration of foreign judgments) provides  that where the Minister of Justice of the Federation of Nigeria is satis fied that in the event of the benefits conferred by Part 1 of the 2004  Act being extended to judgments given in the superior courts of any  foreign country, substantial reciprocity of treatment will be assured with  regard to the enforcement in that foreign country of judgments made by  a superior court in Nigeria; the minister may, by order, direct the extension of Part 1 to that foreign country. No such order has been made  by the Minister of Justice to date. Section 10(a) of the 2004 Act allows  the enforcement of foreign judgments from countries to which Part 1  of the 2004 Act has not been extended, provided that such applications  for enforcement are made within 12 months of the foreign judgment or  within such time frame as the court may permit. Certain foreign judgments may also be enforced under the 1958 Act. This Act deals with the  registration and enforcement of judgments obtained in Nigeria and the  United Kingdom and other parts of Her Majesty’s (Queen of the United  Kingdom) dominions and territories, and was not repealed by the 2004  Act as decided by the Nigerian Supreme Court in the case of Witts &  Busch Ltd v Dale Power Systems Plc. The constitutional approach in  entering into any bilateral or multilateral treaties is that until such an  international treaty signed by Nigeria is enacted into law by the National  Assembly, it has no force of law and its provisions will not be justiciable  in the court of law within the country. This suggests that before the  enactment into law by the National Assembly of such a bilateral or  multilateral treaty to which Nigeria is a signatory, the signed treaty has  no force of law and Nigerian courts cannot give effect to it, as they can  with other laws. This same process is applicable to every amendment  made to any international treaty to which Nigeria is a signatory or party. 

Intra-state variations 

2 Is there uniformity in the law on the enforcement of foreign  judgments among different jurisdictions within the country? 

Nigeria operates a federal system of government comprising 36 states  and a central federal government. Although each state has a legislative  assembly, the authority to make laws on issues regarding the enforcement of foreign judgments is constitutionally vested in the National  Assembly, which is the federal legislative body, as such powers are  contained in the exclusive legislative list of the Constitution. There are  therefore no intra-state variations and there is uniformity in the law on  the enforcement of foreign judgments. 

Sources of law 

3 What are the sources of law regarding the enforcement of  foreign judgments? 

The sources of law are: 

• the 1958 Act; 
• the 2004 Act and the Rules of Court made pursuant to section 5  of the Act; 
• the Sheriffs and Civil Process Act, Chapter S6, Laws of the  Federation of Nigeria 2004; 
• the various civil procedure rules of the superior courts before  which registration and enforcement are sought; and 
• the Judgment Enforcement Rules under section 94 of the Sheriffs  and Civil Processes Act. 

Hague Convention requirements 

4 To the extent the enforcing country is a signatory of the  Hague Convention on Recognition and Enforcement of  Foreign Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters, will the  court require strict compliance with its provisions before  recognising a foreign judgment? 

Nigeria is not a signatory to the Hague Convention on the Recognition  and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters  1971. Its provisions, therefore, do not apply to the application for regis tration and enforcement of foreign judgments in Nigeria.

BRINGING A CLAIM FOR ENFORCEMENT 

Limitation periods 

5 What is the limitation period for enforcement of a foreign  judgment? When does it commence to run? In what  circumstances would the enforcing court consider the statute  of limitations of the foreign jurisdiction? 

A judgment creditor in respect of a judgment to which Part 1 of the 2004  Act applies may apply to a superior court in Nigeria to have the judg ment registered at any time within six years of the date of the judgment,  or where there have been proceedings by way of an appeal against the  judgment, after the date of the last judgment given in those proceed ings. An appeal is defined under the Act to include any proceeding by  way of discharging or setting aside a judgment, an application for a new  trial or a stay of execution. Notably, where the Minister is yet to make  an order extending the application of Part 1 of the Act to a country, the  applicable time limit will be, as provided under section 10 of the Act, 12  months or longer, depending on what is allowed by a superior court of  record in Nigeria. 

For applications for enforcement made pursuant to the 1958 Act,  such applications may be brought within 12 months of the date of  the judgment or a longer period if allowed by the registering court.  Therefore, where an application for registration of a foreign judgment  is not brought within the statutory 12-month period, the application will  be caught by limitation, except when time is extended for the judgment  creditor by the court. This position was affirmed by the Supreme Court  in Marine & Gen Ass Co Plc v OU Ins Ltd (2006) 4 NWLR (Part 971)  622.There are no circumstances stipulated by the Act under which an  enforcing court would consider the statute of limitations of the foreign  jurisdiction. 

Types of enforceable order 

6 Which remedies ordered by a foreign court are enforceable in  your jurisdiction? 

The only order made by a foreign court that is enforceable in Nigeria  pursuant to the 2004 Act is a final judgment that is conclusive between  the parties thereto, under which some money is payable (excluding  sums that are payable in respect of taxes or other charges of a like  nature, such as fines or penalties). 

Competent courts 

7 Must cases seeking enforcement of foreign judgments be  brought in a particular court? 

Yes. The 2004 Act requires registration of a foreign judgment to be  sought before a superior court. A superior court is defined under the Act  as the High Court of a State or of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja,  or the Federal High Court. After the foreign judgment is registered, it  can then be enforced by the registering court. However, in exercising  an abundance of caution, it is pertinent to seek registration of a foreign  judgment in a court whose jurisdiction covers the subject matter of the  original suit conducted outside Nigeria. In Access Bank Plc v Akingbola,  decided in 2014, the High Court of Lagos State ruled that the instant  judgment of the High Court in England could not be registered and  enforced in the Lagos State High Court. The court based this decision on  the grounds that the subject matter of the suit that led to the judgment  was a matter within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Federal High Court  under section 251(1)(e) of the Constitution of Federal Republic of Nigeria  1999 as a matter under the Companies and Allied Matters Act, and if the  original action had been tried in Nigeria, the right court seised with juris diction would be the Federal High Court. The court, therefore, concluded that the application to register should have been sought at the Federal  High Court and quashed the registration of the judgment that was  granted earlier. In Kabo Air Limited v the O’ Corporation Limited (2014)  LPELR-23616 (CA), the Court of Appeal also alluded to the fact that the  subject matter of the judgment sought to be registered was in relation  to aviation, which is within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Federal High  Court, in holding that the Federal High Court had jurisdiction to enter tain the application for registration of a judgment that was obtained in  the Gambia. 

Separation of recognition and enforcement 

8 To what extent is the process for obtaining judicial  recognition of a foreign judgment separate from the process  for enforcement? 

The process of recognition involves a court hearing by a judge who must  first consider an application for the registration of the foreign judgment.  Should the application be granted, the judgment will be registered in  the Register of Judgments. Once the judgment has been registered  and is not set aside on appeal, it can then be enforced by the judgment creditor. Enforcement, on the other hand, may or may not involve  a court hearing. Upon recognition or registration of a foreign judgment,  the judgment creditor may seek to enforce the foreign judgment (which  is now deemed to be the judgment of the court that registered it) by  the various means of execution provided under the Sheriffs and Civil  Process Act. These include execution by issuance of a writ of attachment  that empowers court bailiffs to seize property of the judgment debtor,  and execution through garnishee proceedings, which involves a court  hearing by which moneys due to the judgment debtor from third parties  are attached in satisfaction of the judgment debt. Where property is  to be attached, the judgment creditor must obtain a writ of execution  or fieri facias from the relevant court. The process of obtaining a writ  of execution is mostly administrative and very rarely involves a court  hearing, except in certain situations stipulated under the rules of the  various courts, where the leave of the court must be sought before a  writ of execution can be issued. 

OPPOSITION 

Defences 

9 Can a defendant raise merits-based defences to liability or  to the scope of the award entered in the foreign jurisdiction,  or is the defendant limited to more narrow grounds for  challenging a foreign judgment? 

A defendant cannot raise merits-based defences to liability or defences  as to the scope of the award. The grounds for setting aside the registra tion of a foreign judgment are clearly stipulated under the 2004 Act and  are limited to issues such as fraud, public policy, jurisdiction, lack of  service or lack of sufficient time after service to respond to the action  in the foreign court prior to the entry of the judgment. The courts in  Nigeria have held that a registering court has no appellate jurisdiction  over the foreign court and cannot, therefore, embark upon a merits based assessment of the foreign judgment sought to be registered. 

Injunctive relief 

10 May a party obtain injunctive relief to prevent foreign  judgment enforcement proceedings in your jurisdiction? 

There is no provision in the 2004 Act for a party to obtain injunctive relief  seeking to prevent the enforcement of foreign judgment proceedings in  Nigeria. In Kalu v FGN (2014) 1 NWLR Part 1389, page 479, the Appeal  Court held that injunctive relief, being in personam, is directed against the litigant and not the court or its proceedings. The available remedy  for a defendant, akin to a mandatory injunction, is to bring an application  to set aside the registration of a foreign judgment. However, this can  only be entertained if the foreign judgment was registered in contravention of the 2004 Act, if the original court that gave it lacked jurisdiction,  if it was obtained by fraud or if the rights under it are not vested in the  person that made the application for registration. Similarly, the regis tering court can set aside a judgment if the judgment debtor did not  receive notice of the proceedings in the original court that gave it and  thereby did not appear, making the said judgment a default judgment.

REQUIREMENTS FOR RECOGNITION 

Basic requirements for recognition 

11 What are the basic mandatory requirements for recognition of  a foreign judgment? 

The mandatory requirements for registration or recognition of a foreign  judgment are as follows: 

• the 2004 Act must be applicable to the judgment and the judgment  must be a final judgment; 
• the judgment debtor, as defendant in the original action, must have  received notice of the proceedings (beside service of the processes)  in sufficient time to enable it to defend the proceedings; 
• the foreign court must have jurisdiction in the circumstances of the  case and the foreign judgment must be enforceable by execution in  the country of the original court; 
• the judgment must have been obtained without any form of fraud; • the foreign judgment must conform to public policy in Nigeria; • the judgment creditor must be the applicant for registration of  the judgment; 
• the judgment must not have been wholly satisfied; and • the judgment must be one under which some money is payable, not  being sums that are payable in respect of taxes or other charges of  a like nature, or fines or penalties. 

Other factors 

12 May other non-mandatory factors for recognition of a foreign  judgment be considered and, if so, what factors? 

No non-mandatory factors that are outside the provisions of the  2004 Act may be considered in an application.

Procedural equivalence 

13 Is there a requirement that the judicial proceedings where  the judgment was entered correspond to due process in your  jurisdiction and, if so, how is that requirement evaluated? 

There is no requirement under the 2004 Act that the judicial proceedings  in the foreign court correspond to due process in Nigeria. 

JURISDICTION OF THE FOREIGN COURT 

Personal jurisdiction 

14 Will the enforcing court examine whether the court where  the judgment was entered had personal jurisdiction over the  defendant and, if so, how is that requirement met? 

The Nigerian courts do examine whether the foreign court had personal  jurisdiction over a defendant. One of the grounds under the 2004 Act for  setting aside the registration of a foreign judgment is whether the orig inal court had no jurisdiction in the circumstances of the case. The Act further defines for this purpose when the original court shall be deemed  to have jurisdiction and when the original court shall be deemed not to  have jurisdiction for judgments in an action in personam or in an action in rem. For an action in personam, the original court shall be deemed not to  have jurisdiction if the judgment debtor, being a defendant in the original  proceedings, was a person that under the rules of public international law  was entitled to immunity from the jurisdiction of the courts of the country  of the original court and did not submit to the jurisdiction of that court.  With specific regard to enforcement under the Act, the foreign court is  deemed to have jurisdiction and the foreign judgment is registrable and  enforceable in Nigeria only if the judgment debtor voluntarily appeared  or otherwise agreed to submit to the jurisdiction of the relevant foreign  court, or the judgment debtor was resident in the jurisdiction of the relevant foreign court at the time when the proceedings were instituted. 

Subject-matter jurisdiction 

15 Will the enforcing court examine whether the court where the  judgment was entered had subject-matter jurisdiction over the  controversy and, if so, how is that requirement met? 

The 2004 Act does not specifically direct the enforcing court to examine  whether the original court had subject-matter jurisdiction over the controversy, but this can be inferred in certain circumstances. In considering the  mandatory conditions for registration, such as the foreign court’s jurisdic tion in the circumstances of the case, the enforceability by execution of  the foreign judgment and whether the foreign judgment was obtained by  fraud or not, the registering court may have to visit the subject-matter  jurisdiction of the original court. This is also contingent on whether the  foreign judgment is in rem or in personam. Where the foreign judgment  is in personam, section 6(2)(a) of the Act requires the registering court  to consider the residence of the defendant in the original action; that is,  whether the judgment debtor was resident in the foreign country at the  time of the proceedings, or (if the judgment debtor was a body corporate)  whether its principal place of business is in the original country or the  business being the subject matter was to be performed or executed in  the country of that court. Section 6(2)(b) of the Act deals with judgment  in rem of which the subject matter is movable property. The registering  court will have to consider before registration of the judgment whether  the property (subject matter) was at the time of the proceedings before  the original court situated in the country of that court. Finally, under the  Act, the registering court will also consider subject-matter jurisdiction  where there is controversy as to whether the proceedings of the original  court ran contrary to an agreement by the parties to settle their dispute  otherwise than by proceedings in the courts of the foreign country. 

Service 

16 Must the defendant have been technically or formally served  with notice of the original action in the foreign jurisdiction, or is  actual notice sufficient? How much notice is usually considered  sufficient? 

The judgment debtor must have received actual notice of the proceedings  of the original action in the foreign court within sufficient time to enable  it to appear and defend the proceedings. Under section 6(1)(a)(iii) of the  2004 Act, one of the grounds for setting aside a registered foreign judgment is that, notwithstanding that the processes in the original court may  have been duly served on the judgment debtor (which was the defendant  in the original proceedings), it did not receive notice of those proceedings in sufficient time to enable it to defend the proceedings and did not  appear. There is no stipulation of the length of notice that will be considered as sufficient, but Nigerian courts will usually in such cases follow  the common law rules of reasonable notice, which will be subject to the  circumstances of each case.

Fairness of foreign jurisdiction 

17 Will the court consider the relative inconvenience of the  foreign jurisdiction to the defendant as a basis for declining to  enforce a foreign judgment? 

The relative inconvenience of the foreign judgment to the defendant is  not one of the grounds for declining to register or enforce a foreign judgment under the 2004 Act. Where the parties by whatever agreement  under which the dispute arose or by conduct voluntarily appeared or  submitted to the foreign court’s jurisdiction, the registering court will  not consider the relative inconvenience to the judgment debtor in the  registration or setting aside proceedings. 

EXAMINATION OF THE FOREIGN JUDGMENT 

Vitiation by fraud 

18 Will the court examine the foreign judgment for allegations of  fraud upon the defendant or the court? 

One of the grounds for denying the registration of a foreign judgment  under the 2004 Act is that the judgment was obtained by fraud. The  courts, therefore, ordinarily examine the foreign judgment for any allegation of fraud. 

Public policy 

19 Will the court examine the foreign judgment for consistency  with the enforcing jurisdiction’s public policy and substantive  laws? 

One of the grounds for denying the registration of a foreign judgment is  that enforcement of the judgment would be contrary to public policy in  Nigeria. There is no specific requirement that the foreign judgment be  consistent with substantive laws in Nigeria. 

Conflicting decisions 

20 What will the court do if the foreign judgment sought to  be enforced is in conflict with another final and conclusive  judgment involving the same parties or parties in privity? 

The registering court may set aside the registration of a foreign judg ment if it is satisfied that the matter in dispute in the proceedings in the  original court had, prior to the date of the judgment, been the subject  of a final and conclusive judgment of another court having jurisdiction  over the matter in the original foreign country. The 2004 Act does not  specify whether the judgment obtained in the original proceedings must  have been between the same parties or their privies, but the common  rule applied by Nigerian courts in such cases is that a previous judgment is only binding between the same parties and on the same issue.  The language of the 2004 Act suggests that where there are conflicting  judgments, a subsequent or latter judgment will not be registered and  enforced. Although there is no case law on the point in Nigeria in the  event of conflicting judgments between the parties on the same issue, it  appears from the language of the statute that the judgment that came  first is that which will be registered and enforced. 

Enforcement against third parties 

21 Will a court apply the principles of agency or alter ego to  enforce a judgment against a party other than the named  judgment debtor? 

A judgment is a final decision of the court on a particular subject  matter and is binding only on the parties to the action and their privies.  The court cannot apply principles of agency or alter ego to enforce a judgment against a party other than the named judgment debtor that  was the defendant in the proceedings that led to the judgment. The  alter ego is a distinct person; hence, no judgment delivered against a  specific person can be enforced on the alter ego. The principle of agency  is equally not applicable and a foreign judgment cannot be enforced  against a third-party agent that was not named as the judgment debtor  in the foreign judgment. 

Alternative dispute resolution 

22 What will the court do if the parties had an enforceable  agreement to use alternative dispute resolution, and the  defendant argues that this requirement was not followed by  the party seeking to enforce? 

Section 6(3)(b) of the 2004 Act provides that, if the bringing of proceed ings in the original court was contrary to an agreement under which the  dispute in question was to be settled other than by proceedings in that  court, the court in Nigeria will hold that the foreign court lacked jurisdiction and will refuse to register the foreign judgment; and if registration  had been procured by the judgment creditor ex parte, such registration  may be set aside by the registering court. 

Favourably treated jurisdictions 

23 Are judgments from some foreign jurisdictions given greater  deference than judgments from others? If so, why? 

No more deference is accorded to a judgment of any one foreign juris diction over others. However, only judgments of the courts of the  United Kingdom, the Republic of Ireland and courts of other parts of  Her Majesty’s dominions and territories are registrable and enforceable  under the 1958 Act. Under section 3 of the 2004 Act, the Minister of  Justice may extend Part 1 of the Act, which permits registration and  enforcement of foreign judgments within six years of the date of such  judgment, to any country that accords reciprocal treatment to judgments of superior courts in Nigeria. The Minister of Justice has not  extended the said part to any country to date. Section 9 of the 2004 Act  applies Part 1 of the Act to judgments of courts of all Commonwealth  countries. Accordingly, in respect of judgments of such Commonwealth  countries, an application for registration may be made within six years  of the date of such judgment. Aside from the foregoing, which relates to  the applicability of Part 1 of the 2004 Act to certain countries, no special  or greater deference is accorded to the judgments of the courts of any  one country. 

Alteration of awards 

24 Will a court ever recognise only part of a judgment, or alter  or limit the damage award? 

Where a foreign judgment is in various parts or on different matters,  the registering court can register part of the judgment. Under section  4(4) of the 2004 Act, where part of the judgment has been satisfied  and part unsatisfied, the court can register the part that is unsatisfied.  Additionally, section 4(5) of the Act provides that where part of a judgment can be properly registered, the judgment may be registered in respect of that part alone. There is no provision under the Act for alteration or reduction of damages awarded in a foreign judgment. This would  amount to exercising supervisory or appellate control over the foreign  court, which is not permitted under Nigerian law. 

AWARDS AND SECURITY FOR APPEALS 

Currency, interest, costs 

25 In recognising a foreign judgment, does the court convert the  damage award to local currency and take into account such  factors as interest and court costs and exchange controls?  If interest claims are allowed, which law governs the rate of  interest? 

Section 4(3) of the 2004 Act provides that where the sum payable under  a judgment that is to be registered is expressed in a currency other than  the currency of Nigeria, such a judgment shall be registered as if it were  a judgment for such sum in the currency of Nigeria, based on the rate  of exchange prevailing at the date of the judgment of the original court  equivalent to the sum awarded. The registering court will, in addition to  the original judgment sum, award interest and reasonable costs of and  incidental to

registration, including the costs of obtaining a certified true  copy of the judgment from the original court. This is, however, applicable only to judgments of countries in respect of which the Minister of  Justice has extended Part 1 of the 2004 Act. For judgments registered  pursuant to section 10(a) of the 2004 Act or pursuant to the 1958 Act, the  foreign judgment may be registered and enforced in foreign currency. 

Security 

26 Is there a right to appeal from a judgment recognising or  enforcing a foreign judgment? If so, what procedures, if any,  are available to ensure the judgment will be enforceable  against the defendant if and when it is affirmed? 

A party may appeal to a higher court, in this case the Court of Appeal,  against a decision recognising and enforcing a foreign judgment. The  appeal process is distinct from the process of recognising and enforcing  the foreign judgment that is made at the High Court before which the  judgment is first sought to be recognised and enforced. Where the  High Court has made a final order recognising the award, the judgment debtor may thereafter appeal to the Court of Appeal seeking to set  aside the order of the High Court. The judgment creditor may apply for  a post-judgment Mareva order of injunction that freezes the judgment  debtor’s accounts pending the hearing and determination of the appeal.  This effectively freezes the bank accounts of the judgment debtor and  restrains it from moving its assets outside the jurisdiction or dissipating  them below the adjudged sum within the jurisdiction. 

ENFORCEMENT AND PITFALLS 

Enforcement process 

27 Once a foreign judgment is recognised, what is the process  for enforcing it in your jurisdiction? 

Once registered, the foreign judgment shall, for the purpose of execu tion, be of the same force and effect as a judgment of a superior court  of record in Nigeria. Proceedings may be taken on the registered judgment, the sum for which the judgment is registered shall carry interest  and the registering court shall have the same control over the execution  of a registered judgment as if the judgment had been originally given  in the registering court and entered on the date of registration. After  registration, all the processes by which a judgment of a superior court  may be enforced in Nigeria are available to enforce the foreign judg ment. They include, but are not limited to, writs of attachment of real  and personal property (movable and immovable), garnishee proceedings and committal of the judgment debtor to prison where he or she  is unable to pay the debt after other means of enforcement have failed.  A judgment creditor may also apply to the court for the issuance of  

judgment summons and writ of sequestration in order to enforce the  registered judgment. 

Pitfalls 

28 What are the most common pitfalls in seeking recognition or  enforcement of a foreign judgment in your jurisdiction? 

The most common pitfall is where a defendant ignores a foreign court  process that eventually results in a judgment that is sought to be  enforced under the provisions of the 1958 Act. The case of Grosvenor  Casinos v Halaoui (2009) 10 NWLR, Part 1149, page 309, is authority  for the principle that a foreign judgment entered against a defendant  resident in Nigeria that does not willingly appear in the foreign court or  otherwise submit to its jurisdiction is not registrable in Nigeria under  the 1958 Act. In such cases, it is better to proceed under section 9 or  10 of the 2004 Act. Although Part 1 of the 2004 Act provides a limitation  period of six years, because that part has not been extended to any  country by the Minister of Justice, the limitation period for applying for  registration of foreign judgments (except judgments to which section 9  of the 2004 Act applies) is 12 months from the date of such judgment.  Frequently, applications for registration of foreign judgments are made  outside the limitation period of 12 months without an application for an  extension of time to the registering court. This usually results in such  applications being defeated on a technical basis. Furthermore, after  registration of foreign judgments, enforcement is sometimes stalled or  slowed down by appeals that may continue for years and eventually  reach the Supreme Court of Nigeria, resulting in significant delays. 

UPDATE AND TRENDS 

Hot topics 

29 Are there any emerging trends or hot topics in foreign  judgment enforcement in your jurisdiction? 

Rule 12 of the Rules of Court, made pursuant to section 6 of the 1958  Act, provides that: 

The judgment debtor may at any time within the time limited by  the order giving leave to register after service on him of the notice  of the registration of the judgment apply by petition to a judge to  set aside the registration or to suspend execution on the judg ment and the judge on such application if satisfied that the case  comes within one of the cases in which under section 3 (2) of the  Ordinance no judgment can be ordered to be registered or that it  is not just or convenient that the judgment be enforced in Nigeria  or for other sufficient reason may order that the registration be  set aside or execution on the judgment suspended either uncon ditionally or on such terms as he thinks fit and either altogether  or until such time as he shall direct; provided that the judge may  allow the application to be made at any time after the expiration  of the time mentioned. 

The courts have shown a willingness to strictly apply the provision of  this rule as to the mode of commencing proceedings to set aside or stay  the enforcement of a judgment that has been registered. In the cases of  Heyden Petroleum Ltd v Planet Maritime Co (2018) and Bronwen Energy  Trading Ltd v Crescent Africa (Ghana) Ltd (2018), the Court of Appeal  held that such proceedings can only be commenced by petition, and that  if they are commenced by any other means, the proceedings are bound  to be struck out – as a jurisdictional non-compliance – regardless of  the stage at which an objection is raised. The proceedings would not be  dismissed on this ground, however. Thus, if they are struck out, they can  be refiled by way of petition, subject to limitation of time. In both cases, the judgment debtor or applicant came by way of motion on notice rather than petition. 

Coronavirus 

30 What emergency legislation, relief programs, and other initiatives specific to your practice area has your state implemented to address the pandemic? Have any existing government programs, laws or regulations been amended  to address these concerns? What best practices are advisable  for clients? 

With respect to litigation, several states in Nigeria have adopted meas ures in order to adapt to the impact of the coronavirus pandemic on the  judiciary. One such measure is the use of remote hearings to ensure  cases are heard and disposed of urgently where possible. Thus, courts  such as the High Court of Lagos State issued Practice Directions for the  easy administration and dispensation of justice during the pandemic.  Some courts, such as the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory,  issued Practice Directions providing that time will not run during the  period of the pandemic lockdown. With respect to taxation, a Bill entitled Emergency Economic Stimulus Bill 2020 was passed by the House  of Representative. The Bill, which is yet to be passed at the Senate  level, seeks to: 

• grant a tax rebate of 50 percent of the actual amount due or  paid as Pay As You Earn Tax under the Personal Income Tax Act  by employers who are registered under the Companies and Allied  Matters Act and retain all their employees from 1 March 2020 to 31  December 2020; 
• introduce a new moratorium on mortgage obligations of Nigerians  under the National Housing Fund to the effect that all payment of  mortgage obligations on residential mortgages obtained by individual contributors to the National Housing Fund be deferred for a  period of 180 days; and 
• suspend import duties on medical equipment, medicines and  personal protective equipment required for the treatment and  management of covid-19 for six months, effective from 1 March 2020. 

Furthermore, the Federal Inland Revenue Service on 23 March 2020  announced certain tax relief measures to cushion the effect of the  pandemic on taxpayers. These measures include: 

• electronic filing of tax returns; 
• use of electronic platforms for payment of taxes and processing of  Tax Clearance Certificates; 
• extension of the due date for filing of Value Added Tax and with holding tax returns from the 21st day to the last business day of the  subsequent month; 
• extension of the due date for filing of companies’ income tax returns  by one month; 
• filing of tax returns by taxpayers without audited financial state ments, which must be submitted within two months of the revised  due date of filing; 
• provision of a portal where documents required for desk reviews  and tax audits can be uploaded; 
• waiver of late returns penalty for taxpayers who pay their tax liabili ties early but submit their tax returns later; 
• taxpayers facing challenges in sourcing foreign exchange (FOREX)  to settle tax liabilities on their FOREX-denominated transactions are permitted to pay the Naira equivalent, based on the  prevailing Investors & Exporters FOREX window rate on the day of  payment; and 
• extension of personal income tax returns filing deadline for  personnel of Foreign Affairs, Military and Police, and non-resident  persons by three months from 31 March 2010 to 30 June 2020. 

Etigwe Uwa SAN 

[email protected] 

Adeyinka Aderemi 

[email protected] 

Chinasa Unaegbunam 

[email protected]