Legalpedia Citation: (2014) Legalpedia (CA) 14119
In the Court of Appeal
Fri Nov 14, 2014
Suit Number: CA/AK/18C/2014
CORAM
PARTIES
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF NIGERIA APPELLANTS
ALHAJI ADIGUN AKINOLA RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The Appellant as complainant at the Federal High Court sitting in Akure charged the Respondent and others for the offences of reckless driving, conspiracy and dealing in adulterated or locally refined diesel product without lawful authority under the provisions of Section 343 (1)(a) and 332(1)(a) of the Criminal Code Act Cap. C. 38 L.F.N. 2004 and Section 3 (6) and 1 (17) of the Miscellaneous offences Act Cap.M17 L.F.N. 2004.They all pleaded not guilty to the charges. The present Respondent as Applicant filed a motion on notice to join the Federal Republic of Nigeria and the Commandant, Nigeria Security and Civil Defence as Complainant/Respondent and party interested/Respondent respectively and prayed the court for an order directing the Party Interested/Respondent to release his truck. The party interested Respondent (now Appellant filed a counter-affidavit to the Respondent/Applicant’s affidavit. The trial court granted the application of the Respondent /Applicant. Dissatisfied with the ruling of the trial court, the party interested Respondent appealed to the Court of Appeal.
HELD
Appeal Struck Out
ISSUES
Whether the trial judge was right to have ordered the release of the truck to the Applicant when he was aware that the said truck is an Exhibit the prosecution wishes to tender during trial of the accused persons to prove its case?
RATIONES DECIDENDI
COURT – DUTY OF COURT TO CONSIDER AN APPLICATION ON ITS MERIT WHETHER IT WAS BROUGHT UNDER A WRONG SECTION OR NOT
“It is trite that the court will consider an application on its merit irrespective of whether the same is brought pursuant to a wrong section of the law.”PER M. A. OWOADE, J.C.A
NOTICE OF APPEAL – EFFECT OF AN UNSIGNED NOTICE OF APPEAL
“By the combined effect of the provisions of the Legal Practitioners Act and order 17 Rule 4 (1) (2) (4) & (6) of the Court of Appeal Rules 2011, an unsigned notice of appeal as in the instant case is incompetent. It is a mere document that has no legal value, it cannot be looked into and or considered by the court nor can any court process be predicated on it.”PER M. A. OWOADE, JCA
ORIGINATING PROCESSES- PROCEDURE FOR SIGNING ORIGINATING PROCESSES
“In the case of Okafor v. Nweke (2007) 3 SC (Pt.II) 60, the Supreme Court laid it down that originating processes filed in court are to be signed as follows:
(a) First, the signature of Counsel, which may be any contraption.
(b) Secondly, the name of Counsel that signed the process clearly written.
(c) Thirdly, who Counsel represents.
(d) Fourthly name and address of Legal Firm.”PER M. A. OWOADE, JCA
CASES CITED
STATUTES REFERRED TO
1. Court of Appeal Rules 2011
2. Criminal Code Act Cap. C. 38 L.F.N. 2004
CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT