ALIMI LAWAL VS G.B. OLIVANT (NIG.) LTD
August 22, 2025HAROLD SHODIPO & CO. LTD VS THE DAILY TIMES OF NIGERIA LTD
August 22, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (1972) Legalpedia (SC) 16071
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria
Fri Mar 24, 1972
Suit Number: SC.338/69
CORAM
UDOMA,JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
SOWEMIMO JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
CHIEF J.S. EKPERE
CHIEF J.A. AGANGA(For themselves and as representing the people of Jesse ) Village Community of Jesse Clan.)
OPIEPIEH OGHENEBRUME
OKORO OKESEBOR
APPELLANTS
CHIEF ODAKE AFORIJE
CHIEF JACOB OYIBO (For themselves and on behalf of Mosogan Village Community of Jesse Clan.)
JATHOMAS RUBBER ESTATES LIMITED, SAPELE)
OKE AGBAJE
OKORO EGWRUJE (For themselves and as representing the people of Onyobru Village Community of Jesse Clan.)
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
LAND LAW – DEED OF LEASE – JOINDER OF PARTIES
SUMMARY OF FACTS
On 10th January, 1964, 1st, 2nd and 3rd, 4th defendants acting for and on behalf of the JESSE COMMUNITY purported to grant written consent to assign the residue of the lease to 5th defendant. The Plaintiffs sought a declaration that the land demised by the lease is the exclusive landed property of plaintiffs and not the entire JESSE CLAN COMMUNITY.
HELD
The Court held that the appeal accordingly must be allowed and we set aside the judgment of Rhodes-Vivour, J., in Suit S/11/64 of the 25th of July, 1969, giving the plaintiffs the reliefs sought together with his order as to costs in respect of the action in the High Court…. We accordingly order that the action be struck out.
ISSUES
Whether, once the learned trial Judge had made the order making the 3rd and 4th defendants represent the Onyobru Village Community, he was entitled to make a subsequent order amending his earlier order.
Whether or not the learned trial Judge was in error to grant the application as he did, making the 6th and 7th defendants to be defendants to the action as representing the Onyobru Village Community.
RATIONES DECIDENDI
SEPARATE DEFENDANT IN A REPRESENTATIVE ACTION
“A person represented but dissatisfied with the person representing him might seek to have himself joined as a separate defendant, he is not so joined in substitution of the original representative but as a separate defendant so as to put forward his own view.” LEWIS, JSC.
CASES CITED
Laibru Limited v. Building and Civil Engineering Contractors. (1962) 1 All NLR. 387
Akande v. Araoye & Attorney-General Western Nigeria (1968) NMLR 283 at page 287)
John v. Rees and Ors. (1969) 2 All ER 274 at 284
STATUTES REFERRED TO
Federal Supreme Court Rules, 1961
