CHIEF S. A. DADA VS OTUNBA ADENIRAN OGUNSANYA

CORAM

KAWU – JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

BELGORE – JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

ESO – JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

OLATAWURA – JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

UMARU ATU KALGO (Lead Judgment), JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

WALI JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

OLATAWURA JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

OMO JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

KAWU JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

BELGORE JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

PARTIES

CHIEF S.A. DADA

CHIEF I.O. AJAYI

RT. REV. OLUWOLE AJEDITI (Acting Primate African Church)

CHIEF S.A. AYOKO(Conference Secretary, African Church)

APPELLANTS

OTUNBA ADENIRAN OGUNSANYA (nominated Lay President, African Church)

OTUNBA J. OLUNFEMIWA AWOPEJU (vice Lay President, African Church.)

RESPONDENTS

AREA(S) OF LAW

None.

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The plaintiffs and the defendants were members of the African Church. The Plaintiff sought for a declaration against the validity of the appointment of the defendant as Lay president of the African church without regard to the honoured convention.

HELD

Appeal Dismissed.

ISSUES

Whether the issue of locus standi, which is admittedly an issue of law, can properly be raised under Ord. 22 Rule 4 of the High Court of Lagos (Civil Procedure) Rules, 1972

Whether the plaintiffs’ pleadings disclose a reasonable cause of action

RATIONES DECIDENDI

DISCLOSURE OF A CAUSE OF ACTION

“It should however be pointed out that when considering the issue of disclosure of a cause of action, it is irrelevant to consider the weakness of the plaintiffs’ claim as the learned trial judge would appear to have done in this case. What is important is to examine the averments in the pleadings and see if they disclose some cause of action or raise some questions fit to be decided by a judge. See Thomas v. Olufosoye (supra).” Per KAWU, JSC

LOCUS STANDI

“Locus Standi is a threshold issue, the absence of which terminates the action since the court is thereby bereft of Jurisdiction vide Madukolu v. Nkemdilim (1962)1 All NLR. 587 (595) (1962) 2 SCNLR 341. It therefore behoves a party raising it not to do so under a completely wrong procedure even though it can be raised at any stage of the proceeding.” Per OLATAWARA, JSC