CORAM
ESO, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
SUNDAY AKINOLA AKINTAN JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
NNAMANI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
COKER, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
KAWU, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
KARIBI-WHYTE, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
OPUTA, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
PRINCE YAHAYA ADIGUN & 2 ORS
APPELLANTS
A.G. OF OYO STATE & 18 ORS
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
CHIEFTAINCY MATTERS -FAIR HEARING – CUSTOMARY LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The Appellants appealed against the decision of the court below on the ground that they were not granted fair hearing by panel of inquiry amongst other things
HELD
The Court held that the appeal succeeds on the dismissal of claim No. 2 but fails in respect of the dismissal of claims 1. It is desirable that the appellants, i.e. Ogunmakinde Ande Ruling House along with others be heard in an inquiry to ascertain the relevant customary law. The decision of the Court of Appeal is hereby set aside
ISSUES
Whether the Court of Appeal was right in refusing to hold that the appellants were not given a fair hearing before Dr. Agiri
RATIONES DECIDENDI
DISTINCTION BETWEEN DECLARATION AND DECLARATORY ORDER
When a declaration is claimed in an action in court, the claim is indistinguishable from a claim for “a declaratory order.- Obaseki, JSC.
EFFECT OF BREACH OF RIGHT TO A FAIR HEARING
” The right to fair hearing being a fundamental constitutional right guaranteed by the Constitution, the breach of it in any trial or investigation or inquiry nullifies the trial investigation or inquiry and any action taken on them is also a nullity. If the principles of natural justice are violated in respect of any decision, it is, indeed, immaterial whether the same decision would have been arrived at in the absence of the departure from the essential principles of justice.” Obaseki, JSC.
HEARING
“But all the parties must be heard on written documents. If the tribunal decides to have in addition an oral hearing, all the parties affected must be given an opportunity of an oral hearing. There is no doubt that where parties cannot adequately due to illiteracy put their thoughts into writing an oral hearing may be beneficial.”- Obaseki, JSC.
CASES CITED
Queen v. Director of Audit (W.R.) & Ors (1961) All N.L.R. page 659 at page 660
The Queen v. Chief Idelia-guahan Ozogula 11 Ex-Pane Chief Lewis Epenga (1962) WNLR. 136 at 137…
Local Government v. Arlidge (1915) AC 120
Requries v. Birmingham City Justice, Ex Parte Chris Foreign Foods (wholesales) Ltd.)
Carltona Ltd. v. Commissioner of Works (1943) 1 All ER. 560 at 564
Governor of Kaduna State & Ors. v. Kago-ma (1982) 3 NCLR 1032 at 1069
Kagoma’s case (1982) 6 SC. 87 at page 90
Maxwell v. Department of Trade and Industry (1974) 2 All ER 126-127
STATUTES REFERRED TO
U.K. Food and Drugs Act 1955
Chiefs’ Law as amended by Edict No. 16 of 1975
Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1979
Chiefs’ Law Cap 21 Laws of Oyo State 1978
Interpretation Law Cap 52 Volume 3 Laws of Oyo State
Federal Republic of Nigeria 1979.
Decree No. 1 of 1984 Constitution (Suspension and Modification) Decree 1984 as amended by Decree No. 17 of 1985
Constitution (Suspension and Modification) (Amendment) Decree 1985
Decree No. 32 of 1975 Constitution (Basic Provisions) Decree
Constitution (Basic Provisions) Decree 1975 Decree No. 32 of 1975
The Constitution (Basic Provisions) (Transitional Measures) Decree 1978 Decree No. 15 of 1978
Decree No. 105 of 1979 of Decree No. 32 of 1975
Presidential Constitution of Nigeria 1982 Edition