CHIEF DR. IRENE THOMAS & ORS VS THE MOST REVEREND TIMOTHY OMOTAYO OLUFOSOYE - Legalpedia | The Complete Lawyer - Research | Productivity | Health

CHIEF DR. IRENE THOMAS & ORS VS THE MOST REVEREND TIMOTHY OMOTAYO OLUFOSOYE

GARBA VS THE UNIVERSITY OF MAIDUGURI
July 22, 2025
ERIC UYO VS. ATTORNEY GENERAL BENDEL STATE
July 22, 2025
GARBA VS THE UNIVERSITY OF MAIDUGURI
July 22, 2025
ERIC UYO VS. ATTORNEY GENERAL BENDEL STATE
July 22, 2025
Show all

CHIEF DR. IRENE THOMAS & ORS VS THE MOST REVEREND TIMOTHY OMOTAYO OLUFOSOYE

Legalpedia Citation: (1986) Legalpedia (SC) 10110

In the Supreme Court of Nigeria

Fri Feb 14, 1986

Suit Number: SC. 245/1985

CORAM


CHRISTOPHER CHUKWUMA-ENEH, JUSTICE. SUPREME COURT


PARTIES


CHIEF DR IRENE THOMASOYINADE SOBANDEAYOOLA ADEDAPO OTUYALOMICHAEL OLUMUYIWA FALOMOCHARLES OYESIKUADEKUNLE AKINDELE (For themselves and as representatives of the laity of the Anglican Communion in the Diocese of Lagos) APPELLANTS


RESPONDENTS


AREA(S) OF LAW



SUMMARY OF FACTS

The plaintiffs took out a writ of summons against the defendant, the respondent herein, claiming a declaration that the appointment of Rt. Rev. Bishop Joseph Abiodun Adetiloye as the Bishop of Lagos by the defendant is unconstitutional, null and void and of no effect


HELD


The Court held that the appeal therefore fails. I hereby dismiss the appeal.


ISSUES


1. Whether on the pleading filed by the appellants who were plaintiffs in the action filed in t e High Court of Lagos State, Lagos, the locus standi of the plaintiffs to institute the action was disclosed.


RATIONES DECIDENDI


MEANING OF LOCUS STANDI


“The term “locus standi” denotes legal capacity to institute proceedings in a court of law.” OBASEKI, JSC.


FUNCTION OF COURT


“This Court does not make the law. Its function is to administer and interpret the law.” OBASEKI, JSC.


CASES CITED


1. Wootten, J. in Mckinnon v. Grogan (1974) -1 N.S.W.L.R. 295 at 198-9

2. Momoh v. Olotu (1970) 1 All .L.R. 117

3. Senator Adesanya v. The President of the Federal Republic & Another(1981) 1 All N.L.R. 32.

4. Cooke v. Gill (1873) L.R. 8 C.P. 107, per Brett, J. at 108

5. Gambioda and Ors. v. Esesi and Others (1961) All N.L.R. 584

6. Red v. Brown (1888)22 Q.B.D. 128 per Lord Esher, M.R. at p. 131

7. Letang v. Cooper (1965) 1 Q.B. 222 at p. 242)

8. Keefe v. Welsh (1903) 2 Ir. R. p. 718

9. Rep. of Peru v. Peruvian Guano Co. 35 Ch. Dp. 495).

10.Drummond-Jackson v. British Medical Association (1970) 1 W.L.R. 688; (1970) 1 ALL E.R. 1904C.

11. Moore v. Lawson 31 T.L.R. 418 C.A.

12. Wenlock v. Moloney (1965) 1 W.L.R. 1238; (1965) 2 ALL E.R. 821 C.A.

13. Lee v. The Showmens Guild of Great Britain (1952) 2 Q.B. 329 at 341

14. Amusa Momoh v. limo Olotu (1970) 1 AIIN.L.R. 117


STATUTES REFERRED TO



CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT

Comments are closed.