MR. MARVIN FAITHFUL AWARA V. ALAYE ALALIBO
June 18, 2025THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF NIGERIA & ORS V. ZEBRA ENERGY LIMTED
June 18, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (2002) Legalpedia (SC) 41018
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria
Fri Dec 13, 2002
Suit Number: SC.162/1997
CORAM
AKINTOLA OLUFEMI EJIWUNMI JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
1. MR. MARVIN FAITHFUL AWARA2. CHIEF ANTHONY OPUARI3. CHIEF OSIMA GOGO PRETORU(For themselves and as representing Kula Community) APPELLANT(S) / DEFENDANT(S)
PLAINTIFFS / RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The respondent claimed right to compensation paid with respect to the fishing port in dispute on the basis of direct evidence that the port was established by 4 fisher men from the community. The trial court dismissed their claim on the ground that there were contradictory evidence in respect of another port and that the traditional history pleaded were not proved.
HELD
The court (by majority 3:2) held that the respondents did not plead traditional history and that there was sufficient evidence on record to support the decision of the court of appeal granting the respondent’s claims.
ISSUES
Whether Aba Ama was in dispute so as to make it necessary for the Lower Court to resolve issues relating thereto in reaching a decision on Aba Boko.Whether Court of Appeal had in fact shifted the burden of proof unto the Appellants.Whether the Court of Appeal actually made a case for the Respondents different from the case placed before the Trial Court by the Respondents.Whether there were enough materials on the record of proceedings before the Court of Appeal upon which the Court of Appeal’s decision that the Respondents have proved their title to Aba Boko can be based.
RATIONES DECIDENDI
ONUS ON PLAINTIFF TO PROVE THE VALIDITY OF HIS TITLE
The onus is on the plaintiff to satisfy the court that he is entitled on the evidence brought by him to the declaration he seeks. The acts of ownership must be positive enough to warrant the inference that the plaintiff is the exclusive owner -Mohammed J.S.C
BINDINGNESS OF PLEADING – AS BETWEEN EVIDENCE AND PLEADINGS
Parties are bound by their pleadings and evidence which is at variance with the averments in the pleadings must be disregarded by the court – Mohammed J.S.C.
CASES CITED
Okiji v. Adejobi (1960) SCNLR 133 and Itauma v. Akpe-Ime (2001) 7 S.C. (Pt. II)24Mogaji v. Odofin (1978) 4 S.C. 91 at 94Nneji v. Chukwu (1996)10 NWLR (Pt. 478)265Njoku v. Eke (1973) 5 S.C. 293,N.I.P.C. v. Thompson Organisation (1969) 1 All NLR 138
STATUTES REFERRED TO
None.
