JACOB POPOOLA & ORS VS ADEYEMO

CORAM

MOHAMMED JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

WALI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

O. OLATAWURA JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

KAWU JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

KARIBI-WHYTE JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

PARTIES

JACOB POPOOLA & ORS

APPELLANTS

ADEYEMO

RESPONDENTS

AREA(S) OF LAW

APPEAL- CHIEFTAINCY LAW – EVIDENCE- LACHES

SUMMARY OF FACTS

Declaration on the ground that it was contrary to their custom as confirmed by evidence in recent years.

HELD

The court held that respondents were entitled to be granted their claim and that the cause of action arose when the declaration was published and that they are not guilty of unreasonable delay.

ISSUES

1. Whether section 44 of the Evidence Act which restricts its application to where title or interest in family or communal land is in issue is applicable for the determination of the issue of paternity of Falana, the ancestor of the appellant.

2. Whether the Court of Appeal can refuse to give effect to section 9 Chiefs Law of Oyo state, Cap. 21 which obliged the Court to accept the registered Chieftaincy Declaration (Exhibit A) as the customary law regulating the selection of a person to be a holder of the Chieftaincy to the exclusion of any other customary usage on the ground that the plaintiffs were Ignorant of it.

3. Whether the Court of Appeal directed itself to the issues that are relevant to the resolution of the conflicting traditional history relating to the paternity of the appellant.

RATIONES DECIDENDI

CONFLICT IN TRADITIONAL HISTORY- HOW RESOLVED

‘where there are conflicting traditional history, the proper course in the circumstances is “to test the traditional history by reference to the facts in recent years, as established by evidence and by seeing which of two competing histories is more probable.’ Per Karibi- Whyte J.S.C