header-logo header-logo

12 February 2016
Issue: 7686 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Constitutional law

Ogelegbanwei (for himself and on behalf of the Oporoza community) and 52 others v President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and others [2016] EWHC 8 (QB), [2016] All ER (D) 138 (Jan)

The Queen’s Bench Division ordered that a Nigerian judgment, which awarded the claimants special damages for the equivalent of approximately £400m, be registered against the third defendant as a judgment in the Queen’s Bench Division. However, the court dismissed the claimants’ application to register the judgment against the first and second defendants, the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and the Attorney General of the Federation respectively, where, on the true construction of the State Immunity Act 1978, the first and second defendants were immune from the jurisdiction of the court.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
In this week’s NLJ, Fred Philpott, Gough Square Chambers, invites us to imagine there was no statutory limitation. What would that world be like?
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
back-to-top-scroll