Princess Rosemary Yewande Onile-ere V. Miss Adedoyin Iyabo Onile-ere (2016)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

UZO I. NDUKWE-ANYANWU, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

This is an appeal against the Ruling of the High Court of Lagos State delivered on the 18th day of December, 2013 by Hon. Justice

Bola Okikiolu-Ighile [Mrs.].

The 1st – 8th Claimants now 1st – 8th Respondents in this appeal by a Writ of Summon accompanied by Statement of Claim claimed against the 1st Defendant (now Appellant ) as follows:-

1. The Plaintiffs claim is for a declaration that the will and testament dated the 20th day of March, 2002 and purported to have been executed by Late Prince John Afolabi Onile-Ere is forged, illegal, null and void and cannot be enforced by the 1st Defendant to her benefit

2, An Order directing the Administrator-General of Lagos State to take over the management of the Estate of Late John Afolabi Onile-Ere pending the hearing and determination of the suit herein.

3. An Order directing the 1st and 2nd Defendants to account for the proceeds and administration of the Estate of the deceased till date,
4. An Order directing the Probate Registrar in the alternative to grant to the Plaintiffs Letter of

1

Administration of the Estate of the said decease,

5. An Order restraining the Probate Registrar from granting probate of the purported will to the Defendants and if such had been granted, an order setting same aside.
6. An Order of injunction restraining the 1st and 2nd Defendants, their agents, and privies from interfering howsoever with the management of the deceased estate pending determination of this case, except to account for its proceeds and management prior to the filing of this suit”

In response, the Appellant filed her Statement of Defence, thereby joining issues with the Respondents. The case proceeded to trial. At the conclusion of trial, parties filed their respective final addresses. In the Appellant’s final address, the Appellant raised an issue of jurisdiction to the effect that the originating processes filed by the 1st- 8th Respondents were incompetent having been signed with a name of a law firm rather than a Legal Practitioner.

In response, the 1st – 8th Respondents applied to amend the originating process with a view to curing the defect. The Application was opposed by the Appellant.

In delivering its ruling, the trial

2

judge granted the application for amendment to the dissatisfaction of the Appellant hence this Appeal.

In an Amended Notice of Appeal filed on 9th of June, 2015 and deemed properly filed on 24th of June, 2015, Two (2) grounds of appeal were filed. In accordance with the Rules of this Court, learned counsel for the Appellant filed its brief of argument on 30th of January 2015 but deemed properly filed on the 24th of June, 2015. No brief was filed by all the Respondents in this matter.

The Appellant in her brief has formulated two issues for determination of this appeal. The issues, as contained in the brief are:-