Enforcing Judgments Through Garnishee Proceedings in Nigeria - Crossing the Hurdle of Inconsistent Decisions

Abstract

Every man is entitled to the fruit of his labour, so goes the common saying. In legal parlance, this translates to the trite principle that the court has a duty to ensure that a successful litigant reaps the fruits of his successful litigation. As a result, where a judgment debtor fails to comply with the terms of a judgment, the judgment creditor is entitled to enforce such judgment by adopting a suitable procedure depending on the nature of the judgment. For money judgments, the garnishee proceeding comes in handy and is usually the favoured option by a judgment creditor. By this, a judgment creditor (garnishor) can obtain an order of the court attaching some money in the hands of a third party (garnishee) which belongs to the judgment debtor. Such order compels the garnishee to pay over such funds to the garnishor to satisfy the judgment debtor's indebtedness. As simple as the garnishee proceeding is, views are sharply divided on whether the judgment debtor is a necessary party in garnishee proceedings or merely a nominal party or passive party in the proceedings. The question of whether a garnishee proceeding is a separate mode of enforcement of judgment such that the existence of an application for stay of execution of the judgment would not prevent a garnishor from seeking to enforce the judgment by garnishee proceedings provides another dimension to the divergence of views. This paper highlights the fundamentals of garnishee proceedings in Nigeria and sets out in a concise fashion the different views on this subject. It is the writer's view that a judgment debtor should be regarded as a necessary party to garnishee procceedings because it principally serves the interest of justice, among other reasons. The writer also suggests pragmatic approach to dealing with the existing contradictions in case law.