Nigeria: Understanding Garnishee Proceedings In Nigeria

Last Updated: 12 September 2016
Article by Olayemi Anyanechi and Oriyomi Akinlagun

Introduction

Garnishee proceeding otherwise known as 'garnishment' is a judicial process of execution or enforcement of monetary judgment whereby money belonging to a judgment debtor, in the hands or possession of a third party known as the 'Garnishee' (usually a bank), is attached or seized by a judgment creditor, the 'Garnisher' or 'Garnishor', in satisfaction of a judgment sum or debt. By its nature, Garnishee proceeding is "sui generis", and different from other Court proceedings, although it flows from the judgment that pronounced the debt.1 The extant laws regulating Garnishee proceedings are the Rules of Courts, case laws, the Sheriff and Civil Process Act, Cap S6 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004 ("SCPA") and the Judgment (Enforcement) Rules ("JER") made pursuant to Section 94 of the SCPA.

Garnishee proceedings

Generally, Garnishee proceedings is done in two different stages.2 The first stage is for the garnishee order nisi, while the second stage is for the garnishee order absolute.

At the first stage, the judgment creditor makes an application ex parte to the Court (which need not be the court that gave the judgment) that the judgment debt in the hands of the third party, the Garnishee, be paid directly to the judgment creditor unless there is explanation from the Garnishee why the order nisi should not be made absolute. If the judgment creditor satisfies the Court on the existence of the Garnishee who is holding money due to the judgment debtor, such third party (Garnishee) will be called upon to show cause why the judgment debtor's money in its hands should not be paid over to the judgment creditor, and if the Court is satisfied that the judgment creditor is entitled to attach the debt, the Court will make a garnishee order nisi attaching the debt.3 It is important to note that where the Garnishee proceedings is before a court other than the Court that gave the judgment, a certified copy of the judgment must be attached to the ex-parte application.4

The essence of the order nisi is to direct the Garnishee to appear in court on a specified date to show cause why an order should not be made upon him for the payment to the judgment creditor of the amount of debt owed to the judgment debtor. By statute, a copy of the order nisi must be served on the Garnishee and judgment Debtor at least 14 days before the adjourned date for hearing.

Once a bank, being a garnishee, is served with a garnishee order nisi, the bank's right to pay on cheques is suspended, and the bank at this point is free to set off the judgment debtor's credit balance against the actual indebtedness to the bank, to determine the net balance properly owed for the purpose of the proceedings.

The second stage is for the garnishee order absolute, where on the adjourned date, the Garnishee fails to attend court or show good cause why the order nisi attaching the debt should not be made absolute, the Court may subject to certain limitations make the garnishee order absolute.5 The Garnishee, where necessary also have an option of disputing liability to pay the debt.

Procedure for commencing garnishee proceedings

The procedure required for commencing Garnishee proceedings is contained in Section - 83 (1) & (2) SCPA, which states as follows:

"83 (1)    The court may, upon the ex parte application of any person who is entitled to the benefit of a judgement for the recovery or payment of money, either before or after any oral examination of the debtor liable under such judgment and upon affidavit by the applicant or his legal practitioner that judgment has been recovered and that it is still unsatisfied and to what amount and that any other person is indebted to such debtor and is within the State, order that debts owing from such third person, hereinafter called the garnishee, to such debtor shall be attached to satisfy the judgment or order, together with the costs of the garnishee proceedings and by the same or any subsequent order it may be ordered that the garnishee shall appear before the court to show cause why he should not pay to the person who has obtained such judgment or order the debt due from him to such debtor or so much thereof as may be sufficient to satisfy the judgment or order together with costs aforesaid.

(2)At least fourteen days before the day of hearing, a copy of the order nisi shall be served upon the garnishee and on the judgment debtor"

See also the case of Oceanic Bank Plc vs. Oladepo & Anor. 6

The Divergent views on Garnishee proceedings

In practice generally, Garnishee proceedings as a means of execution or enforcement of judgment has suffered a lot of setbacks due to the divergent views of the Nigerian Courts on the process. Some of these views which we now x-tray by this paper are for ease of understanding classified into two different subheads, as follows:

1.The parties to Garnishee proceedings; and

2.Garnishee Proceedings/Appeal/Stay of execution.

Who are necessary parties to Garnishee proceedings?

Going by the various decisions of the Court of Appeal, judgment debtors are perceived not to be necessary parties to Garnishee proceedings, and these decisions have always been based on the Court's notion that Garnishee proceedings are separate and distinct actions between the judgment creditor and the Garnishee.

In the case of P.P.M.C. Ltd. vs. Delphi Pet. Inc.7 the Court of Appeal per Salami, J.C.A. (as he then was), at page 484 said thus:

"The reason for inability of the appellants to appeal against a garnishee order is for the simple fact that it is a product of proceedings between the judgment creditor and the person in possession of the assets of the judgment debtor. In the instant case, Guaranty Trust Bank is the garnishee or a person holding the assets of the judgment debtor, the appellants herein, while the respondent is the judgment creditor. A garnishee proceeding although incidental to the judgment pronouncing the debt owing, the appellants being judgment debtor are not necessary party to the said proceedings. The procedure whereby the judgment creditor obtains the order of the court to attach from any person within the jurisdiction of the court assets of judgment debtor to satisfy the judgment debt is described as attachment of debt and is one of the several methods of executing judgment. The proceedings for this separate and distinct action is between the respondent, herein and Guaranty Trust Bank Plc., the garnishee which has not appealed the said decision."

See further the case of Denton-West vs. Muoma8

In U.B.A vs. Ekanem 9 the Court of Appeal per Omokri, J.C.A at page 222 described a judgment debtor in a Garnishee proceeding as: -

"...a mere busy body meddling in the affairs that do not concern him"

These positions, taking a cue from the above decisions appears to be the general view in most cases decided by the Court of Appeal. However, it is our opinion that most of these decisions are not the correct position of the law bearing in mind the provisions of the law regulating Garnishee proceedings in Nigeria.

In this regard, we note that Section 83 (1) of the SCPA requires a judgment debtor to be examined orally before or after the order. The implication of this to our mind, we submit, is to the effect that the judgment debtor is expected to be heard in the proceeding that would lead to the making of the order nisi absolute.  This position is further strengthened by the provision of Section 83(2)10 which makes it compulsory for service of the order nisi on the judgment debtor at least 14 days before the making of the order nisi absolute.

A corollary to the above, is the provision of Order VIII, rule 8(1) of the JER, which deals with garnishee proceedings, provides as follows:

If no amount is paid into court, the court, instead of making an order that execution shall issue, may, after hearing the judgment creditor, the garnishee, and the judgment debtor or such of them as appear, determine the question of the liability of the garnishee, and may make such order as to the payment to the judgment creditor of any sum found to be due from the garnishee to the judgment debtor and as to costs as may be just, or may make an order under section 87 of the Act." (underlining is for emphasis)

It suffices to state that by these provisions, a judgment debtor is entitled to appear in Court and be heard before the making of the order nisi absolute, thus making him a necessary party in the order absolute proceedings.

Following from the above therefore, we are of the humble view that the Court of Appeal in most of the cases cited above, failed to recognise the difference between garnishee order nisi and garnishee order absolute proceedings particularly in relation to the issues before the Courts. Thus a careful review of some of these decisions would show that the issues decided by the Courts did not correspond with the issues raised for determination in those cases. Unfortunately, majority of these decisions have been adopted in subsequent judgment of the Courts as precedents.

For instance, in U. B. A. vs. Ekanem11 the issue of who ought to be the necessary parties in the garnishee proceedings was never part of the issues for determination before the Court, what was in issue in that case was a stay of execution filed by the Garnishee. See also the case of Purification Tech. (Nig.) Ltd vs. Attorney General of Lagos State12

In order to determine the necessary parties to a Garnishee proceeding, the Court needs to distinguish between the proceedings for garnishee order nisi and garnishee order absolute. In garnishee order nisi proceedings, by its nature and mode of application, one would agree that the proceedings are only for the judgment creditor and the garnishee. Being an ex parte application, the judgment debtor is excluded from the proceedings and cannot be heard at that stage on the application even when present in Court.

The rationale for this is because the order nisi is a warning, to the garnishee and not an order for the garnishee to pay.  Its effect is simply to freeze whatever sums are standing to the credit of the judgment debtor at the moment when the order is received.

Therefore, any decision by the Court that the judgment debtor is not a necessary party at this stage of the proceedings can be said to be correct. However, where the proceedings extend to the second stage of garnishee order absolute, it becomes a tripartite proceeding between the judgment debtor, judgment creditor and the Garnishee. This of course is because on the adjourned date all parties must have been served with the order nisi in compliance with Section – 83 (2) of the SCPA and afforded the opportunity to dispute the liability or pray that the order nisi be discharged for one reason or the other.

In N.A.O.C. vs. Ogini13, the Court of Appeal per Ogunwumiju at page 152-153 had this to say:

"If the judgment creditor knows that the judgment debtor has an amount of money with any Bank or institution, he will as Garnishor file for an ex parte application to be supported by an affidavit in Form 23 of the Judgment Enforcement Rules (JER) for an order that the Garnishee shall show cause why he should not pay the amount due to the judgment debtor to him. These proceedings are strictly ex parte between the Garnishor (judgment creditor) and the Garnishee (the Bank or institution). Where the court grants the order nisi on the garnishee, the Registrar through the Sheriff of the court must serve on the garnishee, the judgment creditor and the judgment debtor the Order nisi on Form 26 of JER. The registrar must then fix a date not less than 14 days after the service of the order nisi on the judgment creditor, the judgment debtor and the garnishee for hearing. This subsequent hearing envisages a tripartite proceeding in which all interests are represented. That is when the judgment debtor has the opportunity to convince the court to discharge the order nisi by filing affidavits to that effect. After that hearing on notice, the court may discharge the order nisi or make it an order absolute.

Thus, the judgment enforcement rules envisage two proceedings, one ex parte and the other one on notice. I agree with the learned respondent's counsel and my learned brother that there can be no appeal against the order nisi made ex parte. See S. 14(1) of the Court of Appeal Act, Cap. C36, Laws of the Federation, 2004. On the other hand, the garnishee order absolute being proceedings in which all parties have been heard and the interest of the judgment debtor in the money in custody of the Garnishee determined is one in which an appeal can lie to this court." (underlining is for emphasis).

See further the case of Fidelity Bank Plc. vs. Okwuowulu,14 C.B.N. vs. Auto Import Export15 and the case of Sokoto State Govt. vs. Kamdex (Nig.) Ltd where the Court of Appeal per Chukwuma-Eneh, J.C.A said:

"The proceeding envisages three parties to it namely, the judgment creditor (garnishor), the judgment debtor and the garnishee in the instant case - the Standard Trust Bank Ltd. – 3rd appellant."

The position of the Court of Appeal in the more recent cases of N.A.O.C. vs. Ogini, Fidelity Bank Plc. vs. Okwuowulu, C.B.N. vs. Auto Import Export and Sokoto State Govt. vs. Kamdex (Nig.) Ltd seems to be the right step in the right direction pointing to the irresistible conclusion that garnishee order absolute proceedings entails a tripartite proceeding wherein all interests are represented before the order nisi is made absolute. This invariably makes a judgment debtor at this stage of the proceedings a necessary party. Even though most lawyers and the Courts are still under the illusion in practice that a judgment debtor is not to be heard at all in any garnishee proceeding, this we submit is completely wrong in law in view of these recent decisions of the Court.

Filing of Garnishee Proceedings during Appeal/Stay of execution.

The contention whether or not a garnishee proceeding can be filed and sustained during the pendency of an appeal and application for stay of execution can be attributed to the conflicting decisions of Courts on the issue. There are divided opinions on this issue by: (i) those who support that a garnishee proceeding is an independent and a separate action of its own; and (ii) those who believe that a garnishee proceeding cannot be filed and sustained during the pendency of an appeal and application for stay of execution.

The first category of people who believe that garnishee proceedings are independent and separate actions distinct from an appeal and an application for stay of execution derive support for their argument from the decisions of the Court of Appeal in cases like Purification Tech. (Nig.) Ltd vs. Attorney General of Lagos State16 and Denton-West vs. Muoma17 where the court held that the existence of an application seeking for an order of stay of execution of judgment does not preclude a judgement creditor from seeking to use garnishee proceeding to enforce the judgment. Whilst those who support that a garnishee proceeding cannot be filed and sustained during an appeal and an application for stay of execution rely on the decisions of the appellate Court in Standard Trust Bank Ltd vs. Contract Resources Nig Ltd18 and the more recent case of First Inland Bank Plc vs. Effiong19 where the Court held that although filing of an appeal does not ipso facto operate as a stay of execution of the decision appealed against, however where the appellant, in addition to the appeal, files an application for stay of execution or variation of the conditions of stay as imposed by the trial court, it becomes most desirable for both parties and the trial court to ensure that a fait accompli is not thrust upon the appellate court.

It is imperative to note that the relevance of the filing of an application for stay of execution pending an appeal has been emphasized by the Supreme Court in the old case of Vaswani Trading Company vs. Savalakh & Company,20 where Coker, J.S.C. (as he then was) held as follows:

"Whilst by virtue of the provisions of the section, an appeal or filing thereof could not ipso operate as stay of execution, clearly in practice, the position should be different where apart from filing an appeal, the prospective appellant also files an application in this court, by which a stay of execution of the same judgment is sought. In the circumstance, a general appraisal of the whole situation is absolutely necessary and it is most desirable that the court should ensure that, at that stage of the proceedings, it is not possible for any party to present it with a fait accompli"

It is also important to note that the principle behind the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court decisions in Vaswani Trading Company vs. Savalakh & Company and First Inland Bank Plc vs. Effiong stems from the duty placed on courts to preserve the subject matter of an action so as not to render an appeal nugatory if it is successful.

However, in spite of the decisions of the court of appeal in Standard Trust Bank Ltd vs. Contract Resources Nig. Ltd and the recent decision in First Inland Bank Plc vs. Effiong, some of the trial courts still place reliance on the old decisions in Purification Tech. (Nig.) Ltd vs. Attorney General of Lagos State and Denton-West vs. Muoma.

Take for instance, in the unreported case of Julius Berger Nigeria Plc vs. Delta State Government,21 the Applicant filed a motion on notice for stay of the execution of a judgment of the Revenue Court, Warri. The motion for stay of execution was served on the Respondent wherein the court adjourned the motion for hearing, in the presence of the two parties. However, the Respondent, before the hearing of the motion for stay, filed a garnishee proceeding (in another Suit No W/72/2013 between Delta State vs JBN) against the Applicant (in the Suit No. W/1A/2013) and the same judge who adjourned the motion for stay of execution for hearing, now granted the garnishee order nisi to garnish the Applicant's bank accounts. The Applicant (who was the Respondent in Suit W/72/2013) subsequently filed an application to set aside the garnishee proceedings but the application was refused by the trial judge, who relied on the case of Purification Techniques Ltd vs. AG of Lagos State & others (supra). Although the matter was eventually resolved by the parties amicably, however the embarrassment of granting the garnishee order nisi against the party who had the pending application for stay of execution cannot be over emphasized.

We are of the view, therefore, that where Court is faced with the prosecution of a garnishee proceeding when there is a pending appeal and the appellant files an application for stay of execution or variation of the conditions of stay as imposed by the trial court, the trial court ought not to grant the garnishee order, as to do so would destroy the subject matter of the action and render the appeal nugatory if it is successful, thus thrusting upon the court a fait accompli.

In addition, whenever a trial Court is faced with conflicting decisions regarding prosecution of a garnishee proceeding when there is a pending appeal and application for stay of execution, the trial court, we submit, should follow the most recent authority on the issue in deciding the case. We believe strongly in this proposition because we are of the view that whatever decision arrived at by a trial Court who decides to place reliance on the older authorities such as the decision in Purification Techniques Ltd vs AG of Lagos State & others (supra) in the face of the recent decision of the Court of Appeal in First Inland Bank Plc vs. Effiong, runs contrary to the well-established principle of law that where there are two or more conflicting judgments, it is the latest in time that should be followed by the court.

It is in the light of this principle of law vis a vis the decision in First Inland Bank Plc vs. Effiong, that we strongly believe that the correct position of the law on this issue, is that a garnishee proceeding should not be allowed or granted by the court in the face of a pending appeal and an application for stay of execution.

Finally, it is also important to note that the right of appeal where the proceeding is a garnishee order nisi proceeding, resides solely in the judgment creditor and the garnishee, thus precluding the judgment debtor. However, where the proceeding is a garnishee absolute proceedings, the judgment debtor has an inherent right of appeal being a party to the proceedings at that stage. This position is further strengthened by the provisions of Section 109 of the SCPA which gives a judgment debtor the right to apply for stay of proceedings in respect of garnishee proceedings.

Conclusion

From the discussions above, it is submitted that by virtue of Section – 83 (2) of the SCPA, a judgment debtor is a necessary party to a garnishee absolute proceedings and can also exercise the right of appeal in the proceedings.

A garnishee proceeding cannot be filed and sustained during the pendency of an appeal and an application for stay of execution in view of the recent decision of the appellate court in First Inland Bank Plc vs. Effiong.

Footnotes

1 Fidelity Bank Plc Vs. Okwuowulu & Anor (2012) LPELR-8497 (CA).

2 Citizens International Bank Ltd. Vs. SCOA Nigeria Ltd. & Anor. (2006) LPELR-5509(CA).

3 Purification Tech (Nig.) Ltd Vs. A. G., Lagos State (2004) 9 NWLR (Pt. 879) 665

4 Order VIII, Rule 3(1) (b) of the Judgment (Enforcement) Rules.

5 In Re: Diamond Bank Ltd (2002) 17 NWLR Pt 795 120 @ 134.

6 (2012) LPELR-19670 (CA)

7 (2005) 8 NWLR Pt. 928 458

8 (2008) 6 NWLR Pt. 1083 418 @ 442

9 (2010) 6 NWLR Pt. 1190 207

10 Ibid

11 Ibid

12 Supra

13 (2011) 2 NWLR Pt. 1230 131

14 (2013) 6 NWLR (Pt. 1349) 197

15 (2013) 2 NWLR (Pt. 1337) 80 @ 127

16 Supra.

17 Supra.

18 2001) 6 NWLR Pt 708 115

19 (2010) 16 NWLR Pt 1218 199 @ 207

20 (1972) 12 S.C 50 @ 57

21 Suit No W/1A/2013

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
 
In association with
Related Topics
 
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
 
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions