PRESIDENT OF THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA & ANOR V. MR. SAHEED FAWEHINMI & ORS

Legalpedia Citation: (2025-02) Legalpedia 11184 (SC)

In the Supreme Court of Nigeria

Fri Feb 7, 2025

Suit Number: SC.255A/2007

CORAM

Ibrahim Mohammed Musa Saulawa Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria

Jummai Hannatu Sankey Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria

Moore Aseimo Abraham Adumein Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria

Stephen Jonah Adah Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria

Abubakar Sadiq Umar Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria

PARTIES

PRESIDENT OF THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE FEDERATION

APPELLANTS

MR. SAHEED FAWEHINMI
REVENUE MOBILIZATION, ALLOCATION AND FISCAL COMMISSION
DR. (MRS.) NGOZI OKONJO-IWEALA

RESPONDENTS

AREA(S) OF LAW

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, PUBLIC OFFICERS’ REMUNERATION, LOCUS STANDI, JURISDICTION, CIVIL PROCEDURE, APPEAL, SURVIVAL OF ACTIONS

SUMMARY OF FACTS

This case began with an Originating Summons filed by Chief Gani Fawehinmi, SAN (now deceased and substituted by Mr. Saheed Fawehinmi, the 1st Respondent) on February 25, 2004, challenging the payment of salaries to certain Federal Ministers in foreign currency and at rates higher than prescribed by the Certain Political, Public and Judicial Office Holders (Salaries and Allowances, etc) Act No. 6 of 2002. The suit specifically challenged the yearly salary of $247,000 (about N36 Million) paid to Dr. (Mrs.) Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, then Federal Minister of Finance, and $120,000 (about N17 Million) paid to Ambassador Olufemi Adeniji, then Federal Minister of External Affairs, as against the N794,085.00 prescribed by law. The Appellants (President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and Attorney General of the Federation) and the 2nd Respondent filed Preliminary Objections challenging the locus standi of the 1st Respondent. The Federal High Court upheld these objections and struck out the suit on October 7, 2004. The 1st Respondent appealed to the Court of Appeal, which allowed the appeal on July 20, 2007, setting aside the ruling of the Federal High Court and granting all reliefs sought in the Originating Summons. Dissatisfied, the Appellants appealed to the Supreme Court. During the pendency of the appeal, Chief Gani Fawehinmi died in September 2009 and was substituted by his elder brother, Mr. Mohammed Fawehinmi, who also died on August 11, 2021, and was subsequently substituted by Mr. Saheed Fawehinmi, the current 1st Respondent.

HELD

The appeal was allowed.
The judgment of the Court of Appeal granting the reliefs in the plaintiff’s claim was set aside.
The Supreme Court held that the claim being a personal one, it died on the demise of the original plaintiff (Chief Gani Fawehinmi).
The Originating Summons was struck out.
Parties were ordered to bear their respective costs.

ISSUES

Whether the 1st Respondent has locus standi to institute this action.
Whether this was a proper case for the Court of Appeal to invoke its powers under Section 16 (Presently Section 15) of the Court of Appeal Act.
Assuming without conceding that this was a proper case for the Court of Appeal to invoke its powers under Section 16 (presently Section 15) of the Court of Appeal Act, whether the Court of Appeal was right in granting all the reliefs sought in the Originating Summons in the circumstances.

RATIONES DECIDENDI

LOCUS STANDI – DEFINITION AND IMPLICATIONS OF LACK OF LOCUS STANDI

This Court has in a plethora of decisions, defined the term locus standi to mean the legal capacity of a party to maintain an action in a Court of competent jurisdiction. A person is said to have locus standi when he is able to demonstrate satisfactorily to the Court that his civil rights and obligations have been or are likely to be infringed. This is guaranteed by Section 6(6) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended). Stated differently, a person aggrieved must disclose a sufficient interest in the subject matter of an action in Court. The resultant consequence of failure to have or possess locus standi is that it renders the suit incompetent and robs the Court of jurisdiction to entertain same. – Per Jummai Hannatu Sankey, J.S.C.

LOCUS STANDI AND JURISDICTION – INTERCONNECTION BETWEEN LOCUS STANDI AND JURISDICTION

It is settled law that locus standi is the legal capacity of a party to institute an action in a Court of law. Where a party has no locus standi, the Court will have no jurisdiction to hear and determine any claim/action. Locus standi and jurisdictlon are interconnected. Where a party lacks locus standi in a matter, the Court by implication, will lack jurisdiction to adjudicate on the matter. – Per Jummai Hannatu Sankey, J.S.C.

LOCUS STANDI – ISSUE OF LOCUS STANDI CAN BE RAISED AT ANY STAGE OF PROCEEDINGS

Locus standi being an issue of jurisdiction can be raised at any stage or level of the proceedings in a suit even on appeal at the Court of Appeal by any of the parties without leave of Court or by the Court itself suo motu. The Issue can be raised after the plaintiff has duly filed his pleadings by a motion and or in a statement of defence. – Per Jummai Hannatu Sankey, J.S.C.

LOCUS STANDI – LOCUS STANDI AS A CONDITION PRECEDENT TO DETERMINATION OF CASE ON MERITS

Locus standi to institute proceedings in a Court is not dependent on the success or merits of a case; it is a condition precedent to the determination of a case on the merits.– Per Jummai Hannatu Sankey, J.S.C.

LOCUS STANDI – REQUIREMENT TO DEMONSTRATE SUFFICIENT INTEREST IN THE SUIT

In the instant case, it can be gleaned from the affidavit in support of the 1st Respondent’s Originating Summons before the trial Court that he failed to sufficiently demonstrate to the trial Court, and indeed to this Court, how any of his civil rights have been or is likely to be breached. Simply put, he has not shown sufficient interest in the suit.– Per Jummai Hannatu Sankey, J.S.C.

APPEAL PROCEEDINGS – COURT’S POWER TO ADOPT REASONING AND CONCLUSION FROM A SISTER APPEAL

I adopt in full the reasoning and the conclusion in Appeal No: SC/255/2007, to be the reasoning and conclusion of this Appeal No. SC/255A/2007. – Per Stephen Jonah Adah, J.S.C.

APPEAL PROCEEDINGS – CONCURRENCE WITH LEAD JUDGMENT

Having had the opportunity of previewing the draft of the judgment just delivered by my learned brother, the Hon. Justice Adah, JSC, I can not but whole-heartedly concur with the reasoning and conclusion reached therein to the effect that the instant appeal is grossly meritorious. Hence, having adopted the said reasoning and conclusion as mine, I too hereby allow the appeal on the terms of the judgment. – Per Ibrahim Mohammed Musa Saulawa, J.S.C.

SURVIVAL OF ACTIONS – PERSONAL CLAIMS DO NOT SURVIVE DEATH OF PLAINTIFF

The claim being a personal one, dies on the demise of the plaintiff. – Per Stephen Jonah Adah, J.S.C.

CIVIL PROCEDURE – STRIKING OUT OF ORIGINATING SUMMONS WHEN CLAIM ABATES

Since the plaintiff also had died before the completion of this appeal, the hearing of the claim is inconclusive. The claim being a personal one, dies on the demise of the plaintiff. The Originating Summons is therefore, struck out. – Per Stephen Jonah Adah, J.S.C.

CIVIL PROCEDURE – PARTIES TO BEAR THEIR RESPECTIVE COSTS

Parties are to bear their respective costs.– Per Stephen Jonah Adah, J.S.C.

PUBLIC OFFICERS’ REMUNERATION – UNAUTHORIZED PAYMENT IN FOREIGN CURRENCY

A Declaration that no public officer under the Certain Political, Public and Judicial Office Holders (Salaries and Allowances, etc) Act No. 6 of 2002 made on 13th December, 2002 but which is deemed to have come into force on the 29th of May, 1999, is entitled to receive his or her salary in any other currency other than naira. – Per Stephen Jonah Adah, J.S.C.

APPEAL PROCEEDINGS – BRIEF CONCURRENCE WITH LEAD JUDGMENT

I had a preview of the judgment just delivered by my learned brother, Stephen Jonah Adah, JSC. I agree that this appeal is meritorious and I also allow in the manner set out in the leading judgment. – Per Moore Aseimo Abraham Adumein, J.S.C.

APPEAL PROCEEDINGS – ADOPTION OF REASONING IN RELATED APPEAL

I have had a preview of the reasons for judgment just delivered by ADAH, JSC, I adopt it as mine, being a sister appeal to the one of SC/255/2007. I abide by the order made therein.– Per Abubakar Sadiq Umar, J.S.C.

CASES CITED

STATUTES REFERRED TO

Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended), Section 6(6)
Certain Political, Public and Judicial Office Holders (Salaries and Allowances, etc) Act No. 6 of 2002
Court of Appeal Act, Section 16 (Presently Section 15)