CORAM
ADEMOLA, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
UNSWORTH, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
BAIRAMIAN, JUSRICE SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
APPELLANTS
1. FALADE AWOLIYI
2. AMUDA ODOFIN
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
LAND LAW—DECLARATION OF TITLE—APPEAL (PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE—EFFECT OF MINOR BLUNDERS—JUDGMENT—APPEAL)
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The appellant appealed against an interlocutory judgment given at the Trial Court that the Statement of Claim was not filed. Being dissatisfied he appealed to the Supreme Court.
HELD
The Order striking out the case was set aside, it was ordered -that the case be put back on the List in the High Court at Ibadan and proceed to hearing.
ISSUES
Whether the Trial Court was right in granting an interlocutory judgment in view of the fact that the appellants Statement of Claim had been filed?
RATIONES DECIDENDI
DUTY OF A JUDGE TO FACILITATE THE HEARING OF AN ACTION PENDING BEFORE HIM
‘It is part of the duty of a Judge to see that everything is done to facilitate the hearing of an action pending before him. Wherever it is possible to cure an unintentional blunder in the circumstances of a case and it will help to expedite the hearing of an action, the court is to award costs against any delinquent party rather than dismiss or strike out a case for a fault in the proceedings prior to hearing of the case.’ Per ADEMOLA CJF
EFFECT OF BLUNDER COMMITTED, BY A PARTY
‘Blunders must take place from time to time, and it is unjust to hold that because a blunder during interlocutory proceedings has been committed, the party blundering is to incur the penalty of not having the dispute between him and his adversary determined upon the merits.’ Per ADEMOLA CJF
CASES CITED
Thesiger, LJ. in Collins v. Vestry of Paddington (1880) 5 Q.B.D. 368 at pp. 380 and 381
STATUTES REFERRED TO
None.