BHS International Limited V. Attorney-general Of Lagos State & Ors (2016)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

MOHAMMED LAWAL GARBA, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

By way of originating summons dated the 30/10/09 and filed on the 5/11/09, the 1st Respondent had dragged the Appellant before the Lagos State High Court (Hereafter to be called Lower Court) seeking for the determination of the questions and reliefs set out therein which are as follows:

“1. Whether the Race Course (‘hereinafter referred to as Tafawa Balewa Square”) is Crown Land which became vested in the Governor of Lagos State as the success or in title to the Commissioner for the Colony of Lagos who is the registered owner of Tafawa Balewa Square.?

2. Whether by virtue of Section 4(1) of the States (Creation and Transition Provisions) Decree No. 14 of 1967, title in the Tafawa Balewa Square vested in the Governor of Lagos State.?
3. Whether ownership of the Tafawa Balewa Square remains vested in the Governor of Lagos State notwithstanding the provisions of Section 1(1) of the Tafawa Balewa Square Act Cap. 11 Laws of the Federation Nigeria 2004 which only vested authority over the management control of the Tafawa?Balewa Square in the Federal Government?
4. Whether ownership of Tafawa Balewa Square remains vested in the Governor of Lagos State having regard to the succession of the Government of Lagos State to the registered title over Tafawa Balewa Square and unbroken chain of ownership by virtue of which the property become vested in the Governor of Lagos State.?
5. Whether if questions 1, 2, 3, and 4 above are answered in the affirmative is illegal for the defendant to take any step to re-develop, rehabili.. manage or finance the redevelopment, rehabilitation or management the Tafawa Balewa Square without acquiring valid title from the Governor of Lagos State.?

RELIEFS SOUGHT

1. A declaration that Tafawa Balewa Square is Crown Land which become vested in the Governor of Lagos State as the successor in title to Commissioner for the Colony of Lagos who is the registered owner of Tafawa Balewa Square.
2. A declaration that by virtue of Section 4(1) of the States (Creation Transitional Provisions) Decree No. 14 of 1967 , title in the Tafawa Balewa Square is vested in the Governor of Lagos State.

3, A declaration that ownership of the Tafawa Balewa Square remains vested in the Governor of

Lagos State notwithstanding the provisions Section 1(1) (a) of the Tafawa Balewa Square Act Cap Law of the Federation on Nigeria 2004 which only vested authority over management and control of the Tafawa Balewa Square in the Federal Government.

4. A declaration that ownership of the Tafewa Balewa Square…vested in the Governor of Lagos State having regard of the succession the Governor of Lagos State to the registered title over Tafawa Belewa Square and the unbroken chain of ownership by virtue of which properly became vested in the Governor of Lagos State.
5. A declaration that it is illegal for the defendant who has no title from the Lagos State Government to take any step to re-develop, rehabili… manage or finance the redevelopment, rehabilitation or management of the Tafawa Balewa Square without acquiring valid title from the Governor of Lagos State.
6. An order of perpetual injunction restraining the Defendant, its agent, privies or anybody whatsoever from laying claim and/or further trespassing unto the Tafawa Balewa Square for the purpose of repairing rehabilitating, redeveloping, managing or financing the repair rehabilitation,

re-development or management of the Tafawa Balewa Square.”

After receipt of the summons, the Appellant filed a Notice of Preliminary Objection (NPO) challenging the jurisdiction of the Lower Court to adjudicate over the matter and the 1st Respondent, expectedly, opposed the objection by way of a counter affidavit. Before the objection by the Appellant was heard?on their application, the 2nd and 3rd Respondents were joined in the matter and later, the 4th Respondent was also joined, on its own application; all as Defendants to the action.

Meanwhile, the originating summons was converted to a writ of summon at the instance of the 1st Respondent pursuant to which pleadings were filed and exchanged by and between the parties. In its statement of defence filed on the 24/4/2012, the Appellant raised the objection questioning the jurisdiction of the Lower Court to entertain the matter. The 2nd-4th Respondents also raised the same objection in separate Notices of Preliminary objection, which were all heard together and in a Ruling delivered by the Lower Court on the 8/10/12, overruled.

?Not satisfied with the decision by the Lower Court to overrule its

objection and to assume jurisdiction over the matter, the Appellant brought the present appeal vide a Notice and Grounds of Appeal (Notice of Appeal) filed on the 22/10/12, but dated the 19/10/12.

From the four (4) grounds of the appeal, two (2) issues were distilled and said to call for decision by the Court in the Appellants’ brief settled by A. O. Agbola, Esq. and filed on the 9/1/13. They are:

“(1) Whether the Learned trial Judge was right in assuming jurisdiction whilst relying only on the Writ of Summons and Statement of claim of 1st Respondent without considering the contents of the pleadings and affidavits exchanged by the parties? (Ground 2),

(2) Whether the learned trial Judge has jurisdiction to entertain the Claimant/1st Respondent’s action? (Ground l, 3 & 4)?