PROFESSOR T.M. YESUFU V GOVERNOR EDO STATE AND VISITOR, EDO STATE UNIVERSITY

CORAM

EMANUEL OBIOMA OGWUEGBU , JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

PARTIES

PROFESSOR T.M. YESUFU APPELLANTS

RESPONDENTS

AREA(S) OF LAW

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The Plaintiff/ Appellant in this appeal, sued the Defendants/Respondents claiming, a declaration that the 1st Defendant has no lawful authority or power to dissolve the Governing Council of the Edo State University Ekpoma, under the law establishing the University or under any other law whatsoever, and an injunction restraining the Defendants jointly and/or severally by themselves or through their agents, servants or privies from reconstituting, recognizing or having any dealing whatsoever with any Governing Council of the Edo State University except that of which Plaintiff is Pro-Chancellor and Chairman, until the expiration of his four year term of office or until removed from office in accordance with the provisions of the Edo State University Law 1991. The ex parte motion was denied by the learned trial Judge who ordered an accelerated hearing of the motion on notice. The trial judge struck out both the motion on notice and the statement of claim and dismissed the action itself. The appellant appealed unsuccessfully to the Court of Appeal. He further appealed to the Supreme Court.

HELD

The appeal was dismissed for lack of merit.

ISSUES

Whether the Court below was right in holding that the Appellant lacked locus standi on the ground that the appellant was estopped from complaining about the dissolution of the Edo State University Governing Council by 1st Respondent.

RATIONES DECIDENDI

THE DOCTRINE OF EQUITABLE OR PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL

“The doctrine of equitable or promissory estoppel is a rule of substantive law which all courts of law and equity are enjoined to apply.” Per M.E. OGUNDARE, JSC.

FACTORS FOR DETERMINING LOCUS STANDI AND ESTOPPEL

“The factors for determining locus standi are not the same as those for determining estoppel.” Per M.E. OGUNDARE, JSC.

WHEN ESTOPPEL CAN BE RAISED

“Estoppel cannot be raised as a preliminary objection to the institution of an action. It can only be raised as a defense to an action properly brought before the Court. To argue that a person is estopped from making a claim in court there is a presumption that the action is properly before the court i.e., that the action is properly constituted in all respects. Estoppel is only a defense put forward by the Defendant(s) in their pleadings in the case and can only be established by evidence.” Per M.E. OGUNDARE, JSC.