Go to AfricaBib home

Go to AfricaBib home AfricaBib Go to database home

bibliographic database
Line
Previous page New search

The free AfricaBib App for Android is available here

Periodical article Periodical article Leiden University catalogue Leiden University catalogue WorldCat catalogue WorldCat
Title:Common law, judicial precedents and the Nigerian receivership procedure
Author:Adebola, Bolanle
Year:2014
Periodical:Journal of African Law (ISSN 0021-8553)
Volume:58
Issue:1
Pages:129-144
Language:English
Geographic term:Nigeria
Subjects:jurisprudence
supreme courts
legal procedure
financial management
commercial law
External link:https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021855313000181
Abstract:Before the enactment of the Companies and Allied Matters Act (CAMA) 1990, receivership in Nigeria was governed by case law, informal rules (of practice) and the Companies Decree 1968. Receivership is the situation in which an institution or enterprise is being held by a receiver, a person 'placed in the custodial responsibility for the property of others, including tangible and intangible assets and rights,' especially in cases where a company cannot meet its financial obligations or enters bankruptcy. In this article the receiver refers to the receiver or manager appointed over all or substantially all of a company's assets. Nigerian judges were heavily influenced by British case law, precedents were British and the Nigerian Companies Decree was a transplant of the British Companies Act 1948. Against this background, the Supreme Court of Nigeria delivered the Intercontractors decisions in 1988, which subsequently governed the nature, status and powers of Nigerian receivers. In 1990, CAMA introduced a more robust receivership regime which prescribed the nature, status and powers of the receiver, reversing some of the Intercontractors principles. However, the courts, particularly the Supreme Court, failed to enforce the relevant provisions of CAMA or to examine the applicability of the Intercontractors principles that they conscientiously enforced. This article examines the validity of the Intercontractors principles and their continued relevance under CAMA 2004. Notes, ref., sum. [Journal abstract]
Views