FESTUS IBIDAYO ADESANOYE V. COMFORT MOROLAYE ADESANOYE
August 27, 2025RAMOND OZO V. THE STATE
August 27, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (1971) Legalpedia (SC) 80114
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria
Thu Apr 15, 1971
Suit Number: SC 275/1969
CORAM
ADEMOLA, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
LEWIS, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
MADARIKAN, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
RAJI ORIARE APPELLANTS
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The plaintiff claimed declaration of title to 601 acres of land which he stated the Government of Nigeria acquired compulsorily from him in 1934 when his family was paid compensation for the crops on the land and without paying for the land itself, Government went into possession. He wrote several petitions to the Government and the compensation was still not paid.
HELD
The Court dismissed the appeal of the appellant which was against the joinder of the 4th and 5th defendant holding that they were properly joined by the learned judge of the High Court as they were necessary for the determination of the case.
ISSUES
Whether the rules of court as stated above are wide enough to admit a joinder of the two parties, or whether for some reasons their being joined in the case would help to resolve the issue before the court and bring the litigation to an end.
RATIONES DECIDENDI
INTERVENERS
In the case of interveners, Devlin, J. (as he then was), laid down a test, accepted and often quoted by many judges thereafter, thus “May the order for which the plaintiff is asking directly affect the intervener in the enjoyment of his legal right?” Per Ademola, CJN
JOINDER OF PARTIES
Undoubtedly, the matter of joinder of parties is of great procedural importance, and the first question which comes to our mind is to examine the rules of court in this matter and thus be guided by the rules. Per Ademola, CJN
CASES CITED
Amon v. Raphael Tuck and Sons Ltd. (1956) 1 QB..357 p.371
In re Vandervells Trust v. White & Ors. (1970) 3 WLR. 452
STATUTES REFERRED TO
High Court, Western State (Civil Procedure) Rules
