md←→ previous / next
Before Their Lordships
OLABODE RHODES-VIVOUR Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria
KUMAI BAYANG AKA’AHS Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria
CHIMA CENTUS NWEZE Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria
EJEMBI EKO Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria
PAUL ADAMU GALINJE Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria
KUMAI BAYANG AKA’AHS Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria
CHIMA CENTUS NWEZE Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria
EJEMBI EKO Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria
PAUL ADAMU GALINJE Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria
Between
1. J. SUNKANMI DAIRO
2. MR. WILSON
3. THE REGISTERED TRUSTEES OF THE ASSEMBLY OF GOD
4. E. A. OGUNMAYIN
5. AYODELE MEGBUNAWON
6. AYODELE OLOWOLAGBA
(As the Head and Representative of the Oloto Chieftaincy Family)
7. RUFAI FASHOLA AIAYI
(As the Head and Representative of the Oloto Chieftainc y Family) – Appellants
AND
THE REGISTERED TRUSTEES OF THE ANGLICAN DIOCESE OF LAGOS – Respondent
…………………….A…………………….
KUMAI BAYANG AKA’AHS, J.S.C. (Delivering the Leading Judgment): The respondent as plaintiff who instituted the action claimed in its Amended Writ of Summons and Further Amended Statement of Claim dated 17th April, 1989 the following reliefs:-
1. The sum of N11, 000.00 being special and general damages for trespass committed by the defendants on the plaintiffs land lying and situate at Iwaya, Lagos State of Nigeria, which said piece and parcel of land is covered by a Deed of Conveyance dated 30th day of June, 1948 and registered as No 42 at page 42 in Volume 776 of the register of Deeds kept in the Land Registry, Lagos.
2. Injunction restraining the defendants, his (sic) servants and/or agents from committing further acts of trespass on the said land.
In proof of its case, the plaintiff called 3 witnesses while each of the 1st-6th defendants testified and the 7th defendant called 4 witnesses.
In a reserved judgment, the trial Court dismissed the first claim of the plaintiff/respondent but granted the second claim as contained in the aforesaid amended writ of summons. Dissatisfied with the judgment, the appellants appealed to the Court of Appeal, Lagos (herein referred to as Court below or lower Court). In its judgment delivered on the 18/3/2002, the Court below allowed the appeal in part by dismissing the second claim of the plaintiff/respondent and in its place granted an order of injunction against the 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th and 7th defendants/appellants and awarding N1,000.00 as damages against the defendants/appellants. The present appeal is against the judgment of the Court of Appeal delivered on the said 18/3/2002. The Notice of Appeal filed on 17/6/2002 is to be found at pages 878-881 Volume 11 of the records of appeal and contains four grounds of appeal. An amended Notice of Appeal was filed on 20/3/2009 containing five grounds of appeal from which the appellants distilled three issues for determination as follows:-
1. Whether from the facts of this case as contained in the printed record, it can be said that the respondent has the legal capacity to institute this action, and if not, whether the trial Court had the requisite jurisdiction to entertain respondent’s suit and whether the Court of Appeal was right to affirm such jurisdiction – Grounds 1, 4 and 5.
2. Whether the appellants admitted the juristic personality of the respondent and if at all whether such admission of the appellants can confer juristic personality on the respondent where none exists – Ground 2.
3. Whether based on the foregoing, the respondents can maintain an action in trespass against the appellants – Ground 3.
The respondent also submitted three issues for determination as follows:-
(a) Whether the appellants can at this stage still raise the issue of the legal capacity of the respondent, when same have been dealt with and rejected by the two lower Courts?
b) Whether the appellants have properly joined issues with the respondent as to the juristic personality of the respondent herein?
c) Whether the respondent can maintain this action?
A person must have the requisite legal capacity to be a party to a law suit See: Fawehinmi v. Nigeria Bar Association (No. 2) (1989) 2 NWLR (Pt. 105) 558; Iga v. Amakiri (1976) 11 SC 1 at 8-9; Kwara Hotels Ltd v. Ishola 2002 9 NWLR (Pt. 773) 604 at 622-623. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that from the facts adduced at the trial Court and as contained in the printed record, the respondent has not established its legal capacity/competence to institute this action. He contended that where the legal personality of a company or corporation called into question and issue joined thereon, the Certificate of Incorporation should be produced as it is only by that Certificate of Incorporation that its legal personality can be proved.
In response, learned counsel for the respondent referred to Paragraph 1 of the respondent’s further amended Statement of Claim where it was pleaded:-
“1. The Plaintiff(s) at all material times to this action are the Registered Trustees of the Anglican Diocese of Lagos and have their office at 2, Bishop’s Court Marina, Lagos” – and submitted that none of the present appellants (who were 7 in number at the trial Court) specifically joined issues with the above assertion of the Plaintiff/Respondent. It is learned counsel’s argument that the appellants’ statement of defence contained only a bare and evasive denial as to the juristic position of the Plaintiff/Respondent. He said that despite the deliberate refusal by the appellants to join issues
2. Injunction restraining the defendants, his (sic) servants and/or agents from committing further acts of trespass on the said land.
In proof of its case, the plaintiff called 3 witnesses while each of the 1st-6th defendants testified and the 7th defendant called 4 witnesses.
In a reserved judgment, the trial Court dismissed the first claim of the plaintiff/respondent but granted the second claim as contained in the aforesaid amended writ of summons. Dissatisfied with the judgment, the appellants appealed to the Court of Appeal, Lagos (herein referred to as Court below or lower Court). In its judgment delivered on the 18/3/2002, the Court below allowed the appeal in part by dismissing the second claim of the plaintiff/respondent and in its place granted an order of injunction against the 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th and 7th defendants/appellants and awarding N1,000.00 as damages against the defendants/appellants. The present appeal is against the judgment of the Court of Appeal delivered on the said 18/3/2002. The Notice of Appeal filed on 17/6/2002 is to be found at pages 878-881 Volume 11 of the records of appeal and contains four grounds of appeal. An amended Notice of Appeal was filed on 20/3/2009 containing five grounds of appeal from which the appellants distilled three issues for determination as follows:-
1. Whether from the facts of this case as contained in the printed record, it can be said that the respondent has the legal capacity to institute this action, and if not, whether the trial Court had the requisite jurisdiction to entertain respondent’s suit and whether the Court of Appeal was right to affirm such jurisdiction – Grounds 1, 4 and 5.
2. Whether the appellants admitted the juristic personality of the respondent and if at all whether such admission of the appellants can confer juristic personality on the respondent where none exists – Ground 2.
3. Whether based on the foregoing, the respondents can maintain an action in trespass against the appellants – Ground 3.
The respondent also submitted three issues for determination as follows:-
(a) Whether the appellants can at this stage still raise the issue of the legal capacity of the respondent, when same have been dealt with and rejected by the two lower Courts?
b) Whether the appellants have properly joined issues with the respondent as to the juristic personality of the respondent herein?
c) Whether the respondent can maintain this action?
A person must have the requisite legal capacity to be a party to a law suit See: Fawehinmi v. Nigeria Bar Association (No. 2) (1989) 2 NWLR (Pt. 105) 558; Iga v. Amakiri (1976) 11 SC 1 at 8-9; Kwara Hotels Ltd v. Ishola 2002 9 NWLR (Pt. 773) 604 at 622-623. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that from the facts adduced at the trial Court and as contained in the printed record, the respondent has not established its legal capacity/competence to institute this action. He contended that where the legal personality of a company or corporation called into question and issue joined thereon, the Certificate of Incorporation should be produced as it is only by that Certificate of Incorporation that its legal personality can be proved.
In response, learned counsel for the respondent referred to Paragraph 1 of the respondent’s further amended Statement of Claim where it was pleaded:-
“1. The Plaintiff(s) at all material times to this action are the Registered Trustees of the Anglican Diocese of Lagos and have their office at 2, Bishop’s Court Marina, Lagos” – and submitted that none of the present appellants (who were 7 in number at the trial Court) specifically joined issues with the above assertion of the Plaintiff/Respondent. It is learned counsel’s argument that the appellants’ statement of defence contained only a bare and evasive denial as to the juristic position of the Plaintiff/Respondent. He said that despite the deliberate refusal by the appellants to join issues
…………………….B…………………….
Continue reading DAIRO & ORS v. THE REGISTERED TRUSTEES OF THE ANGLICAN DIOCESE OF LAGOS
You have read the opening. Unlock the full library once and it stays unlocked - one payment, no subscription, the same library as the app.
- All 725 Laws of the Federation, A to Z
- 916 full judgments and 269 case collections
- 8,046 legal principles and 124 rules of court
- 343 drafts, with the Draft Builder
- The Law Dictionary - 31,442 terms
- Law School notes and 2,082 MCQs
Every Act, case collection and principle beginning with A, B or C is free to read in full, without unlocking - the same boundary as the Android app.