Mr. Gbenga Famurewa V. Mr. Aremu Omokayode Anjorin & Ors (2016)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

YARGATA BYENCHIT NIMPAR, J.C.A.

This appeal is against the judgment of the Lagos State High Court delivered by HON. JUSTICE Y. O. IDOWU on the 14th May, 2010 wherein the claim of the 1st – 5th Respondents for declaration of title to land was granted and the Appellant dissatisfied with the said judgment filed a Notice of Appeal dated 24/05/2010 on the 27/05/10 setting out 2 grounds of appeal.

The 1st – 5th Respondents as claimants by way of an Amended Writ of Summons and Amended Statement of Claim sought for declaration of title to a piece of Land at Addo village of Eti – Osa Local Government Area of Lagos State. The Appellant was joined after the initiation of the suit and with issues joined, the matter proceeded to trial after which the reliefs of the 1st – 5th Respondents were granted. Aggrieved with the said judgment, the Appellant filed a Notice of appeal challenging the decision.

The Appellant’s Brief of Argument settled by Temitayo Ojeleke was filed on the 4/2/11 deemed on the 12/2/16. A reply brief was filed on the 11/4/16. The 1st – 5th Respondents’ Brief of Argument settled by Clement

1

Onwuenwunor is dated 21/3/2016 filed on the 22/3/16. The Appellant distilled 3 issues for determination namely:

1. Whether the 1st 5th Respondents (claimants in the lower Court) pleaded and proved their root of title to the parcel of land for which declaration of title is sought.

2. Whether the 1st 5th Respondents had identified the land in dispute with sufficient certainty to justify the grant of a declaration of title.

3. Whether the evidence adduced by the 1st-5th Respondents justifies the grant of a declaration of title to land.

The 1st – 5th Respondents did not distill any issue for determination but adopted the issues set out by the Appellant. The Court observes that there are two grounds of appeal which generated 3 issues for determination and it is trite that a party cannot formulate issues for determination more than the number of grounds of Appeal as was done here. See TERIBA V ADEYEMO (2010) LPELR – 3143 (SC) wherein the apex Court held thus:

“The settled principle is that it is not proper to proliferate issues for determination to the extent of their outnumbering the grounds of appeal. This is because issues

2

must of necessity be predicated on or arise from grounds of appeal; they can only be either equal to or less than the grounds of appeal and no more. Thus while two or more grounds of appeal can, by some dexterity, be considered in an issue, it is not desirable to split a ground of appeal into a number of issues.”

The apex Court in a long line of authorities settled the issue of proliferation of issues and it was noted in the case of PILLARS NIG. LTD V MRS HANNAH DESBORDES & ORS (2009) LPELR 8204 (CA) thus: