"Order 25 Rules 1 - 7, of the Rules of the lower Court make copious or elaborate provisions for "Pre-trial Conference and Scheduling". One thing that is clear from the provisions of the said Order, is that Pre-trial is a separate and unique aspect in the adjudicatory process before the lower Court and that it has to be initiated by either the claimant or the defendant in an action. It is also clear from the provisions of the said Order 25, that where the claimant or the defendant fails to initiate "Pre-trial Conference", the Court upon the receipt of the certificate of the registrar that neither the claimant nor the defendant has applied for the initiation or commencement of "Pre-trial Conference" can properly have the case in question struck out after complying with the conditions stipulated for the purpose. Order 25 Rule 6 of the Rules of the lower Court in my considered view further attests to the distinctiveness of "Pre-trial Conference" by specifically providing as follows:

"If a party or his legal practitioner fails to attend the pre-trial conference or obey a scheduling or order pre-trial order or is substantially unprepared to participate in the conference or fails to participate in good faith the Judge shall:

(a) In the case of the claimant dismiss the claim; or

(b) In the case of a defendant enter final judgment against him.

Any judgment given under this Rule may be set aside upon an application made within 7 days of the judgment or such other period as the pre-trial Judge may allow not exceeding the pre-trial conference period. The application shall be accompanied by an undertaking to participate effectively in the pre-trial conference."

Per LOKULO-SODIPE, J.C.A.IN SKYE BANK v. UWALEKE CITATION: (2018) LPELR-45016(CA)