Lawani Adesokan & Ors. V. Sunday Adetunji & Ors. (1994)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

OGUNDARE, J.S.C.

By a Writ of Summons issued in May, 1987 the plaintiffs (who are respondents herein) sued all the defendants including the 4th to the 7th defendants who are now appellants before us and shall hereinafter be so referred, claiming:

“(a) Declaration that according to the law, custom and tradition of Tede there are only Three ruling houses for the Onitede of Tede Chieftaincy.

(b) A declaration that the instrument dated 18th day of January, 1958 and registered on the 12th day of February, 1958, in so far as it purports to declare the customary law prevailing in Tede with respect to the appointment to the Onitede of Tede Chieftaincy is wrongful, illegal and void.

(c) Injunction restraining the first three defendants, their servants, officers and agents from inviting the Gbangbade Erun family to present a candidate for the vacant Onitede of Tede Chieftaincy, and from acting pursuant to or taking any steps to implement the aforesaid registered ‘declaration’.

On the plaintiffs filing and serving their statement of claim on all the defendants including the appellants, the appellants moved the trial court for an order “striking out the plaintiffs/respondents’ statement of claim and dismissing this action” on the grounds:

“1. The plaintiffs/respondents have no locus standi to institute this action.

2. This Honourable Court has no jurisdiction to entertain this action.
3. The plaintiffs/respondents’ Statement of Claim in this case discloses no reasonable cause of action and the action is embarrassing, frivolous, vexatious and an abuse of the process of the Court.”

The learned trial Judge took arguments from counsel to the respective parties and in a reserved ruling held that the plaintiffs had not shown that they had an interest in the Onitede of Tede Chieftaincy. He further held that:-

“the plaintiffs have no locus standi in this matter”

and concluded:-

“Having held that the plaintiffs have no locus standi, that is the end of the suit and I am obliged to dismiss it. The suit filed by the plaintiffs is accordingly dismissed. (See generally, Chief Mrs. F.Akintola & Anor v. Mrs. C.F AD. Solano (1986) 2 NWLR (Pt.24) p. 598 per Oputa, J.S.C. at p. 623 of the Report.”

Being dissatisfied with the order of dismissal of the action the plaintiffs appealed to the Court of Appeal upon the following ground:

“The learned trial Judge erred in law when he held as follows:-

‘Having held that the plaintiffs have no locus standi, that is the end of the suit and I am obliged to dismiss it. The suit filed by the plaintiffs is accordingly dismissed.’