Irenuma Odiase & Anor V. Vincent Agho & Ors. (1972)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

LEWIS, J.S.C.

In Suit B/18/68 in the Benin High Court, the plaintiffs filed an originating summons in the following terms:-

“IN THE MATTER OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF DOCUMENTS IN THE MATTER OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT LAW (CAP. 68) SECTION 13. IN THE MATTER OF INQUIRY INTO WARD BOUNDARY DISPUTES. IN THE MATTER OF THE FINDING OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT ADVISER.

ORIGINATING SUMMONS

ORDER 5, RULE 4 OF THE RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT OF ENGLAND, 1965.

Let all parties (that is to say the Plaintiffs and the Defendants herein) attend the Judge at the High Court of Justice, Benin City on the 12th day of July, 1968 at the hour of 9O’clock in the forenoon or so soon thereafter as counsel may be heard on behalf of the plaintiffs herein for:-

A. A Judicial Construction of “The Moat” as appears in the documents marked Exhibits “AA”, “BB” and “CC” attached to this Summons having regard to the following:-

(i) Reference is made to two moats in Exhibit “AA” whereas Exhibit “BB” only refers to “the moat”;

(ii) The Local Government Adviser’s reasoning in Exhibit “AA” reference paragraphs 2, 3, 12,13,15,16 and 17 is inconsistent with his explanation in Exhibit “CC”;

(iii) “The moat” as appears in paragraph 17 of Exhibit “AA” and in Exhibit “BB” is none other than the moat referred to in paragraphs 12, 13, 14 and 15 of Exhibit “AA”:

B. A declaration as to whether on the facts found by the Local Government Adviser in Exhibit “AA” and his ruling therein, his subsequent ruling in Exhibit “CC” is correct having regard to the combined effect of the facts and ruling in Exhibits “AA” and “BB”.

C. A declaration that the ruling of the Local Government Adviser as contained in Exhibit “CC” is inconsistent with his opinion in Exhibit “AA” especially having regard to:-

(1) his finding in Exhibit “AA” in paragraph 14 thereof;

(2) To his finding in respect of Ward boundary dispute between Wards 1 to 43B reference paragraph 13 of Exhibit “A”.