Rt. Hon Emeka Ihedioha & Anor V. Owelle Rochas Anayo Okorocha & Ors (2015)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report

JOHN INYANG OKORO, J.S.C.

This is an appeal against the judgment of the Court of Appeal sitting at Owerri wherein the lower Court struck out the appellants’ appeal for the incompetence of the notice of appeal. The said notice of appeal can be found on pages 631 – 640 of the record of appeal.

The appellants’ appeal at the lower Court was against the ruling of the Governorship Election Tribunal, Owerri delivered on 22/7/2015 which dismissed their petition for being abandoned by reason of non-valid application for issuance of pre-trial forms in line with Paragraph 18 of the 1st Schedule to the Electoral Act, 2010 (as amended).

The facts leading to this appeal further disclose that during the hearing of the objection before the Tribunal, the 11th respondent, supported the preliminary objection while the 13th, 14th, 25th, 30th and 31st respondents supported the contrary position held by the petitioners.

That despite the open expression of interest by the 11th, 13th, 14th, 25th, 30th and 37th respondents in the outcome of the objection, the appellants in their notice of appeal, left out the

1

names of the 2nd 36th respondents from the list of parties directly affected by the appeal as required by Order 6 Rule 2 of the Court of Appeal Rules. 2011.

Also the appellants equally failed to endorse the notice of appeal with the addresses for service on the 2nd – 36th respondents.

See also  Major I. Z. Umoru (Rtd) V Alhaji Abubakar Zibiri And Ors (2003) LLJR-SC

It was partly for the above failings that the 1st and 37th respondents, in filing their brief of argument to the substantive appeal at the lower Court, incorporated therein, a preliminary objection to the competence of the appeal.

On 21st August, 2015 when both the preliminary objection and the appeals came up for hearing by the Court below, the Registrar of the Court, immediately after the Court had taken appearances of counsel, announced to the Court as follows:

“Confirmed that all the respondents were served”

Moreso, even the brief of argument the appellants “served” on the 3rd, 4th, 6th, 12th, 15 – 24th, 26th – 29th, 32nd – 36th respondents were simply deposited at the office of the 37th respondent at Owerri. The Court below in its judgment observed that it was shown an affidavit which showed that the Bailiff dumped copies of the notice of

2

appeal for the 3rd, 4th, 6th, 12th, 15th 24th, 26th 29th, 32nd the 36th respondent with the Protocol Officer of the APC, the 37th respondent on 28th July, 2015.

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *