Hon Danjuma Usman Shiddi v. David S. U. Jimkuta & Ors (2023)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report – SUPREME COURT

CHIMA CENTUS NWEZE, JSC (Delivering the leading judgment)

The first respondent commenced an action, by way of originating summons, before the Federal High Court, Jalingo Judicial Division, on June 30, 2022.

This suit, for reasons best known to the first respondent, was abandoned and discontinued.

Thereafter, the first respondent initiated another suit, by way of originating summons, before the Federal High Court, Abuja Judicial Division on July 7, 2022.

The first respondent sought the determination of four questions and upon favourable answers to the questions, he supplicated the grant of nine reliefs in his favour.

The appellant and third respondent, respectively, filed a preliminary objection on one part, challenging the trial court’s jurisdiction to hear the suit. On the other part, they filed their counter-affidavit in opposition to the originating summons.

By its judgment delivered on November 24, 2022, the trial court, having dismissed the preliminary objection of the appellant and third respondent, found in favour of the appellant. Accordingly, the suit was dismissed.

Dissatisfied with the decision of the trial court, the first respondent appealed to the lower court. The lower court, by its judgment, delivered on February 8, 2023, allowed the appeal, thereby setting aside the decision of the trial court.

Aggrieved by the decision of the lower court, the appellant has now appealed to this court via two notices of appeal filed on February 9, 2023 and February 15, 2023.

When this appeal came up for hearing, Chief Wole Olanipekun, CFR, SAN, leading others for the appellant, relying on the notice of appeal filed on February 15, 2023, adopted the appellant’s brief of argument filed on February 20, 2023, along with reply brief filed on February 26, 2023, as the appellant’s legal arguments in urging this court to allow the appeal. In the said brief of argument, he formulated four issues for determination, to wit:

1. Did the lower court have the jurisdiction to pronounce on the propriety of forwarding the name of the appellant herein to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) as the candidate for the Taraba South Senatorial District in the manner it did?
2. Considering the nature of claims and the reliefs sought by the first respondent in his originating summons, whether the lower court had the requisite jurisdiction to grant same?
3. Was the lower court with the requisite vires under section 285 (9) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended) to have considered and made findings on diverse subjects which led to its grant of the reliefs in the originating summons filed by the first respondent?
4. In view of the materials placed before the lower court by the parties before it, whether its decision to allow the appeal and grant the reliefs sought by the first respondents (herein), as plaintiff in the originating summons, was correct?

In opposing the instant appeal, J. J. Usman, SAN, leading others for the first respondent, adopted the first respondent’s brief of argument filed on February 24, 2023, as the first respondent’s legal arguments in urging this court to dismiss the appeal. In the said brief of argument, he formulated two issues for determination, to wit:

1. Whether the lower court had the jurisdiction to entertain the first respondent’s appeal?
2. Whether their lordships of the lower court was right when their Lordships allowed the first respondent’s appeal and granted the reliefs sought?

Three sets of issues are virtually the same. Appellant’s issue one embodies issues two and three and the law is that superfluous or duplication issues for determination and arguments therein, is a concept which is alien to our rules of practice.

Consequent on the foregoing, I shall be guided in the determination of this appeal by the issues formulated by the first respondent. The two issues shall be taken and considered together.

Appellant’s submissions