MR. OMIETE MICHAEL KLANGO VS THE GOVERNOR OF BAYELSA STATE OF NIGERIA
May 28, 2025MR. AUGUSTINE OMINI IWARA V. MR. UBI ETTAH ITAM (Alias Bombay) & ANOR
May 28, 2025egalpedia Citation: (2009-02) Legalpedia 72507 (SC)
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria
Holden at Abuja
Fri Feb 13, 2009
Suit Number: SC 189/2002
CORAM
D MUSDAPHER, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
G A OGUNTADE, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
I F OGBUAGU, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
P O ADEREMI, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
M S MUNTAKA-COOMASSIE, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
MADAM MEMINOTU IBRAHIM
APPELLANTS
DR. LASISI OSUNDE
DR. DAPO LAWAL
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
STATUTORY RIGHT OF OCCUPANCY
SUMMARY OF FACTS
This was an appeal against the judgment of the Court of Appeal dismissing the appellant’s appeal against the judgment of the High Court which had earlier dismissed the claims of the plaintiff /appellant which are, declaration that the plaintiff is the owner by inheritance of all that parcel of land, and an order of perpetual injunction restraining the defendant by themselves servants and/or privies from doing on the land anything inconsistent with rights and interest of the plaintiff. But granted all the counter claims claimed by the defendants. Dissatisfied with the entire judgment, the plaintiff/appellant lodged an appeal to the Court of Appeal and further to the Supreme Court.
HELD
The appeal was allowed. The Judgments of the two courts below were set aside. Judgment was entered in favor of the plaintiff.
ISSUES
1. Whether failure by owner of land to make verbal protest against an act of trespass committed in his presence in his land is enough ground for declaring the trespasser owner of the land.
2. Whether the 2nd defendant/ respondent made out a case in his counter claim which was capable of being supported by the evidence of the 4th witness called by the plaintiff/appellant.
RATIONES DECIDENDI
IT IS WRONG FOR AN ADMINISTRATOR TO CLAIM PROPERTY AS HIS OWN
“It is wrong, in law, for an administrator of an estate or anybody claiming through him, to assimilate that property to his own, Equity will not even permit that under any guise. To say the least, it is gross abuse of office.” Per P. O. ADEREMI, JSC
NO ONE SHALL TAKE ADVANTAGE OF HIS WRONG DOING
“No one can or shall take advantage of his own wrong doing, the Maxim is “NULLUM COMMODUM CAPERE POTEST DE INJURUA SUA PROPRIA” r EX TURPI CAUSA NON ORITUR ACTIO.” Per P. O. ADEREMI, JSC
NO RIGHT OF ACTION IN AN UNCLEAN MANNER
“No polluted hand shall be allowed to touch the pure fountain of justice. One shall not have a right of action when one comes to a court of justice in the unclean manner.” Per P. O. ADEREMI, JSC
CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE AN APPELLATE COURT CAN INTERFERE IN D FINDINGS OF THE LOWER COURT
“Concurrent findings of facts cannot ordinarily be disturbed by the appellate court. But, where the findings of the courts below, as in the instant case, have shown that the conclusion reached was patently wrong or perverse, then an appellate court, which this court is, can, in the interest of justice, interfere.” Per P. O. ADEREMI, JSC
CASES CITED
Nwosu v. Board of Customs & Excise (1988) 5 NWLR (Pt. 93) 22
Nneji v. Chukwu (1996) 10 NWLR (Pt. 478) 265
Coker v. Oguimjola & Ors. (1985) 6 S. C. 223
STATUTES REFERRED TO
None
