May 15, 2025
Legalpedia Citation: (2013-04) Legalpedia (SC) 90511 In the Supreme Court of Nigeria Fri Apr 19, 2013 Suit Number: SC. 110/2004 CORAM JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT […]
CORAM
JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
BODE RHODES-VIVOUR, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
BODE RHODES-VIVOUR, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
MAHMUD MOHAMMED, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
BODE RHODES-VIVOUR, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
MARY UKAEGO PETER ODILI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
KUMAJ BAYANG AKAAHS, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
MAHMUD MOHAMMED, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
MAHMUD MOHAMMED, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
MAHMUD MOHAMMED, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
MAHMUD MOHAMMED, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
MAHMUD MOHAMMED, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
MAHMUD MOHAMMED, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
MAHMUD MOHAMMED, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
MAHMUD MOHAMMED, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
MAHMUD MOHAMMED, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
BODE RHODES-VIVOUR, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
MAHMUD MOHAMMED, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
JOHN AFOLABI FABIYI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
1. ALLISON AKENE AYIDA
2. MRS. REMI VICTORIA AYIDA
3.OLADIPO AKANNI OLUMUYIWA WILLIAMS, SAN
4. DR. (MRS.) HENRIETTA MARIA WILLIAMS
5. FLOUR MILLS OF NIGERIA PLC
APPELLANTS
TOWN PLANNING AUTHORITY & ANOR
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The Appellants who were the claimant/Applicant in the lower court issued a writ of mandamus to the 1st respondent to compel him to restrain the 2nd respondent from converting a community that is made residential by an existing law into a commercial use. The trial court refused the application because they did not serve demand notice on the 1st respondent as mandated by the law. The applicant appeal to the court of appeal and the judgment of the lower court was affirmed. Hence this appeal to the Supreme Court.
HELD
APPEAL DISMISSED
ISSUES
“(1) Whether Nigerian law requires that an applicant for an order of mandamus must establish that he made a prior demand for performance of the duty sought to be enforced and the authority concerned refused to comply with the demand?
(2) Whether the Court below erred in holding that the High Court was right to have invoked the provision of Edict No. 2 of 1998 and hold that Edict had effectively revoked Section 42 of the Town and Country Planning Law (TCPL)?
(3) Whether the Court below erred in law in refusing to grant the alternative reliefs for declaration and injunction as claimed by the Appellants?
RATIONES DECIDENDI
GRANT OF RELIEF-POWER OF THE COURT TO GRANT A DECLARATORY OR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF.
“The law is trite that the order of declaration or injunction as claimed by the Appellants can only be granted if the Appellants had established their legal right to the subject matter of the claim.”- PER MAHMUD MOHAMMED JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
JUDICIAL REVIEW- MEANING OF AN ORDER OF MANDAMUS
The question is what is this Order of Mandamus?
“The Prerogative Order of Mandamus commands any person or body to whom it is directed to perform a public duty imposed by law”.- PER MAHMUD MOHAMMED JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
GRANT OF AN ORDER OF MANDAMUS- REQUIREMENT OF THE LAW IN THE GRANT OF AN ORDER OF MANDAMUS
“The position is therefore quite plain that the requirement of demand for performance of the public duty countered with refusal to perform, is part of the requirements of the law to be complied with before an Applicant for an Order of Mandamus can be entitled to that relief”.- PER MAHMUD MOHAMMED JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
CASES CITED
Chukwurah v. Shell Petroleum (1993) 4 N.W.LR. (Pt. 289) 512 Judicial Service Commlsion v. Omo (1990) 6 N.W.LR. (Pt. 157) 407, Bashir Alade Shita-Bey v. Federal Public Service Commission (1981) 1 S.C. 40 at 57 – 58 ?
STATUTES REFERRED TO
INTERPRETATION ACT, 1964.THE CONSTITUTION OF FEDERAL REPULIC OF NIGERIA, 1979, AND 1999.TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING LAW OF LAGOS STATE.