PATRICK ABUSOMWAN VS G.O. AIWERIOBA & ANOR
July 4, 2025HON. JUSTICE T.A.A. AYORINDE VS A-G AND COMMISSIONER FOR JUSTICE OYO STATE & ORS
July 4, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (1996) Legalpedia (SC) 37716
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria
Tue Feb 27, 1996
Suit Number: SC.7/1993
CORAM
MUHAMMADU LAWAL UWAIS JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
MICHAEL EKUNDAYO OGUNDARE JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
YEKINI OLAYIWOLA ADIO JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
ANTHONY IKECHUKWU IGUH JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
MABEL AYANKOYAKEHINDE FAMAKINWAJ.R. ALOFOJEO. HASSANBEATRICE AWOSUSIA.O. ADEOGUNCOMFORT AYENIMOJIRADE OWOLABIFUNLAYO ADEYEMI APPELLANTS
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The plaintiffs’ claim against the Defendants is for the Recovery of various sums of money totalling Twenty-Four Thousand. Six Hundred and Twenty-Nine Naira (N24,629) being money paid by the plaintiffs to the Defendants for the Purchase of assorted Brands of cartons of Beer and Drinks.The Defendants failed to supply the cartons of beer and drinks. And have refused to refund the payments for the beer and drinks.
HELD
The appeal has merit and it succeeds. The judgment of the learned trial Judge dated 17th July, 1987, is hereby restored in its place. The respondents shall pay N500.00 as costs in the court below and N 1,000.00 as costs in this court.
ISSUES
“(1) Whether the lower court was right by its reference to foreign rules of court in the construction of local rules of court, especially when the local rules of procedure provided for a wider base.(2) Whether the plaintiffs’ action was incompetent for misjoinder of parties and/or misjoinder of causes of action.(3) Whether the lower court was right in basing its decision solely on technicality of procedure, especially when the procedure is not fundamentally defective.(4) Whether the Court of Appeal should not have discovered that vicarious liability is applicable to conversion in this case.”
RATIONES DECIDENDI
JOINDER OF CAUSES OF ACTION
In the case of joinder of causes of action, Order 10 rule 1 of the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules of Oyo State provides that subject to the rules, the plaintiff may unite in the same action several causes of action but if it appears to the court or a Judge that any such causes of action cannot be conveniently tried or disposed of together, the court or Judge may order separate trials of any such causes of action is to be had or may make such other order as may be necessary or expedient for the separate disposal thereof
The rules in the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules of Oyo State permitting joinder of parties or joinder of causes of action are designed to prevent multiplicity of actions and prevent delay and thus save the parties unnecessary costs
JOINDER OF CAUSES OF ACTION
“An action cannot be defeated on the grounds of non-joinder or mis-joinder. Per ADIO, JSC
APPLICATION OF ENGLISH RULES
I think the contention made for the appellants that the English rules could be applied by the High Court in Oyo State only when there was no provision made for the matter in question in the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules of Oyo State was right. Per ADIO, JSC
CASES CITED
Adediran v. Interland Transport Ltd. (1991) 9 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 214) 155Kalu V Odili (1992) 5 N. W.L.R. (Pt.240) 130 at p. 185
STATUTES REFERRED TO
