CORAM
BELLO JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
UWAIS JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
WALI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
OLATAWURA, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
M.E. OGUNDARE, SUPREME COURT JUSTICE,
S.U. ONU, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
LAWANI ADESOKAN VS SUNDAY ADETUNJI
APPELLANTS
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
By a Writ of Summons issued in May, 1987, the plaintiffs (who are respondents herein) sued all the defendants including the 4th to the 7th defendants who are now appellants before us and shall hereinafter be so referred, claiming Declaration that according to the law, custom and tradition of Tede there are only Three ruling houses for the Onitede of Tede Chieftaincy, A declaration that the instrument dated 18th day of January, 1958 and registered on the 12th day of February, 1958, in so far as it purports to declare the customary law prevailing in Tede with respect to the appointment to the Onitede of Tede Chieftaincy is wrongful, illegal and void, and Injunction restraining the first three defendants, their servants, officers and agents from inviting the Gbangbade Erun family to present a candidate for the vacant Onitede of Tede Chieftaincy, and from acting pursuant to or taking any steps to implement the aforesaid registered declaration.
HELD
APPEAL ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED
ISSUES
Whether the proper order in the judgment should be one of ‘dismissal’ or of ‘striking out’ where the court held that a plaintiff had no locus standi in relation to the reliefs he sought from the court.
RATIONES DECIDENDI
COURT WOULD NOT EMBARK ON CONFLICTING DECISIONS OF TWO SUPREME COURT
“It is not the business of the court to embark on a consideration of a conflict between one decision of the Supreme Court and another decision of the Supreme Court when issues warranting the consideration of the conflict are not raised in the grounds of appeal and when the facts of the two cases alleged to be in conflict are totally different from one another. Caution is a virtue that should not be dispensed with at any stage of the proceedings before any court” PER OGUNDARE, J.S.C
JURISDICTION OF THE SUPREME COURT
“It is trite law that there being no appeal by the appellants against the ruling of the trial Judge to the Court of Appeal on whether there was a reasonable cause of action or not the issue cannot now be raised in the Supreme Court whose appellate jurisdiction is to hear and determine on the decision of the Court of Appeal and not on that of the High Court” PER OGUNDARE, J.S.C
ANY PARTY WITHOUT LOCUS STANDI WOULD NOT HAVE CAUSE OF ACTION
“It is trite law that if a party has no locus standi he has no reasonable cause of action.” PER OGUNDARE, J.S.C
ANY APPLICANT SEEKING TO APPLY FOR AN ORDER OF MANDAMUS MUST HAVE LOCUS STANDI
“It is fundamental that an applicant for leave to apply for an order of mandamus must have locus standi to make the application before leave can be granted by the court. Indeed the party making any claim and bringing any application before the court must have locus standi” PER OGUNDARE, J.S.C
CASES CITED
Adesanya v. President of Nigeria
Irene Thomas v. Olufosoye
Oloriode & Ors v. Oyebi & Ors (1984) 5 S.C. 1 at 28; (1984) 1 SCNLR 390.
B.O. Nwabueze & Anor v. O. Okoye (1988) 4 NWLR (Pt. 91) 664 at 679
STATUTES REFERRED TO
See Section 213(1) of the Constitution of Federal Republic of Nigeria 1979