Federal College Of Education Osiele, Abeokuta V. Chief Olufemi Ajayi (2014)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

MUDASHIRU NASIRU ONIYANGI, J.C.A. (Delivering the leading Judgment)

At the Federal High Court Abeokuta, the respondent instituted a civil action. In his Statement of Claim dated 18/7/2007 in Suit number FHC/AB/CS/20/2007, he is claiming as follows:

(a) The sum of N5,000,000.00 (Five million Naira)

(b) Cost of this action.

The summary of the fact leading to the Suit is that the daughter of Gbonjubola Ajayi a student of the appellant (Federal College of Education Osiele, Abeokuta Ogun State) died in an inferno that engulfed the room allocated to her in the student hostel of the institution (the appellant) in the early hours of Sunday the 11th day of March 2007.

The suit was set down for hearing before the court below. The appellant by way of a notice of preliminary objection challenged the jurisdiction of the trial court on the ground that the action is statute barred and relying on Section 2(a) of the Public Officer Protection Act, Cap. p.41. Laws of Federation of Nigeria 2004 and urged the court to dismiss the action.

The respondent plaintiff objected to the application and submitted that the action was not statute barred haven regard to the provision of Section 4(1) of the (Torts Law) (Fatal Accident) Cap. 126 of Laws of Ogun State 1978 which prescribed a period of 3 years from the date of demise of the victim within which to commence a tortuous action for damages.

In a considered Ruling by Hon. Justice C. M. A. Olatoregun on the 13th day of December 2007, the court overruled the preliminary objection and dismissed same. See pages 6 to 7 of the said ruling where the court concluded as follows:

“I have had a look at the Torts Law of Ogun State Cap. 126 and in particular ss 3-7 which deal with fatal Accident.

And it is my view that actions brought under the Fatal Accident Law can be commenced within three years after the death of such deceased person.

This case is therefore not caught by the general limitation period provided by the public officer which no doubt the defendant is one.

I therefore dismiss the preliminary objection dated 24/9/07”.

Dissatisfied with the conclusion of the court hence this appeal predicated on the notice of appeal dated and filed on the 14th day of May 2009. The appeal is fought on two grounds. I reproduce herein below the two grounds with their particulars.

Ground One