H.R.M. Munene Efiong Mbukpa ETA & Ors V. Prof. Itam Hogan Itam & Ors (2016)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

JOSEPH OLUBUNMI KAYODE OYEWOLE, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

This is in respect of an appeal against the judgment of the High Court of Cross River State, Calabar Judicial Division delivered by ABUA J. on the 25th September, 2013 dismissing an application for certiorari filed by the appellants in respect of the dispute involving the stool of Muri Munene, the paramount ruler of the Efut Kingdom of cross River State.

Following the dismissal of the said application for certiorari, the appellants invoked the appellate jurisdiction of this Court via a Notice of Appeal filed on the 25th September, 2013 containing 10 grounds.

At the hearing of the appeal, Chief Onyebueke, the learned lead counsel for the appellants adopted his appellants’ brief filed on 19th November, 2013 as well as the appellants’ reply brief filed on the 15th May, 2014 as the arguments of the appellants in this appeal.

For the 1st respondent, his learned counsel Mrs. Asuquo adopted her brief filed on the 10th January, 2014 as the arguments of the 1st respondent in this appeal.

The learned counsel for the 2nd-4th respondents, Mr. Asuquo adopted their

1

brief filed on 28th January, 2014 but deemed properly filed and served on the 10th February, 2016 as the arguments of the 2nd -4th respondents in this appeal.

At the instance of the appellants, leave was granted for the appeal to be heard without the briefs of the 5th and 6th respondents who had failed to file any brief despite service of all processes on them.

The appellants submitted five issues for determination as follows:

(1) Whether the appellants filed the affidavit of service as required by Order 40 Rule 5 of the High Court of Cross River State (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2008 and whether the respondents were served with the originating process.

(2) Whether the letter of 18th day of September, 2012 that contained the approval of the Governor can be quashed by a certiorari application.

(3) Whether a Judge can sit on appeal against the judgment of coordinate jurisdiction.

(4) Whether a party is bound to react to every affidavit filed in the Court and whether there are cases pending in Court.