This is more so because, when a process is filed in court, the said process is endorsed with the fees ‘service fees’, without any such service being done upon such charge and payment thereby made. What is later discovered is that the applicant or person filing the said process is confronted with by the Court’s Bailiff to demand his own fees which are un-prescribed and unreasonable and non-commensurate with the mileage of such service. That is why this paper is written calling for memoranda to determine whether the ‘service fees’ is legally charged by courts’ registries and whether after such charge and endorsement of the fees ‘service fees’ on courts’ processes, any other fees have to be paid to any Court’s bailiff in order to serve such court’s process for which service fees has already been charged and paid? First and foremost, it is the argument and submission of the writer of this paper that the issue of service fee has been provided for by Rules of all courts in Nigeria. For instance, under the new High Court of the Federal Capital Territory-Abuja, (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2018, Order 7 Rule 14 provides for ‘expenses of service’ thus ‘(1) The party requiring service of any process shall pay in advance all costs and expenses incidental to service. (2) The costs and expenses for service shall be as directed by the Chief Judge in Practice Direction from time to time’. Also, Order 29 of the repealed High Court of the Federal Capital Territory-Abuja (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2004 also provides in Order 11 Rule 29 thus ‘The costs incidental to the execution of process(es) in a suit shall be paid in the first place by the party requiring the execution, and the bailiff shall not (except by order of the Court) be bound to serve or execute any process unless the fess and reasonable expenses have been paid’. Furthermore, by the provisions of Part C of Order 6 Rule 28 of the Federal High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2009, on ‘expenses of service’ it is provided thus ‘the costs of and incidental to the execution of any process in a suit shall be paid in the first place by the party requiring the execution, and the sheriff shall not (except by order of the Court) be bound to serve or execute any process unless the fees and reasonable expenses thereof shall have been previously paid or tendered to him’. And by Appendix 5, of the Federal High Court (Civil Procedure) Rule, 2009, of Regulation 6 of Regulation Regarding Fees, it is provided that ‘All fees for service, execution, and distance in kilometers shall be paid into revenue’, of which the Registrar has been mandated to endorse the fees paid and issue receipt for such payment by Regulations 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 7 of the said Regulations Regarding Fees. Similar provisions are made under the Fifth Schedule to the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory-Abuja (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2018 on Regulations Regarding Fees. Furthermore, the same thing as said above about service of court processes, the Sheriff and Civil Process Act, 2004 has provided in section 8, 11 and 18 on service of writs, duties of the Sheriff and the fees to be paid to form part of Consolidated Revenue Fund. Reference is further made to Order I Rules 4, 5, 6 and 16 of the Judgments (Enforcement) Rules of Court made pursuant to the Sheriff and Civil Process Act, among other provisions. From the above provisions of laws, there some facts that are clear as can be deduced as follows:
- The Court’s registrar is empowered to assess chargeable fees for service of court’s processes;
- A receipt shall be issued to the payer of such fees by the court’s registry or cashier;
- Such payment of service fees shall be endorsed on the said process to be served by the court’s bailiff;
- Such payment for service of court’s processes shall be paid into revenue or consolidated Revenue Fund (of government);
- The payer of such service fees needs not pay any additional fees to any bailiff or sheriff of the court after having paid to the court’s registry;
- The Court’s Bailiff or Sheriff is duty bound to effect such service of the court’s process without demanding any additional fees in order to serve the said process;
- Any such fees demanded to be paid after the payer has paid for service is illegal, unlawful and an act of corruption;
- The Head of Court i.e. Chief Judge has the power to make Practice Direction/Directive on any fees inadequate commensurate with the kilometer or mileage of such service of court’s process;
- The current service fees being paid to court’s bailiff to effect service after the Registry of the court has charged the payer is illegal, unlawful and corruption of the court’s system.
- A person can undertake to serve his process and if he intends to serve by himself, he shall not be charged for any ‘service fees’ by the court’s registry or registrar upon filing of the process.
Tel: 08066192650, 08033739869, 08061133497, info@hybridconsults.com, hybridconsult@yahoo.com