CHIEF M. A. INEGBEDION VS DR. SELO- OJEMEN & ORS Archives - Legalpedia | The Complete Lawyer - Research | Productivity | Health

CHIEF M. A. INEGBEDION VS DR. SELO- OJEMEN & ORS

Legalpedia Citation: (2013-01) Legalpedia (SC) 07611

In the Supreme Court of Nigeria

Fri Jan 18, 2013

Suit Number: SC. 92/2004

CORAM



PARTIES


CHIEF M. A. INEGBEDION APPELLANTS


DR. SELO- OJEMEN & ORS

RESPONDENTS 


AREA(S) OF LAW



SUMMARY OF FACTS

The Plaintiff sued the Defendant for negligence, defamation and breach of Doctor/Patient confidence. At the trial court the defendant challenged the jurisdiction of the court to hear the matter and made an application that the suit be stuck out to which the Defendant did not file a counter affidavit. The trial court granted the Defendant’s application. upon appeal to the Court of Appeal, the appeal was dismissed , further appeal was then made to the Supreme Court.?


HELD


Appeal  dismissed?


ISSUES


1. Whether the lower Court was right in holding that in view of Section 251(1) (p), (q) and (r) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria the Trial Court lacked the jurisdiction to entertain the suit?


RATIONES DECIDENDI


Jurisdiction of the Federal High Court


‘The effect of paragraphs(p)(q)and (r) of Section 251(1)of the 199 Constitution is to vest exclusive jurisdiction on the Federal High Court over all civil causes and matters in which the Federal Government or any of its agencies is a party’-Stanley Shenko Alagoa(JSC)


Facts not disputed are deemed admitted


‘It is trite law that any unchallenged and uncontradicted fact in an affidavit remains undisputed and is deemed admitted by the adversary and the court will so hold. However, it is also the law that any such unchallenged and uncontradicted facts which are deemed admitted in the affidavit must be capable of proving and supporting the applicant relying on such facts. in other words, it has been held that the affidavit evidence which is said to be unchallenged must necessarily be cogent and strong enough to sustain the case of the applicant’-Olukayode Ariwoola(JSC)


CASES CITED


NEPA V. Edegbero (2002)103 LRCN 2280 at 2281-2282Ogoejeofo  V. Ogoejeofo(2006)1SCM113Alagbe V. Abimbola(1978)2 SC 39 at 40Egbuna V. Egbuna(1989)2 NWLR (Pt.106) 773 at 777


STATUTES REFERRED TO


Section 251 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria?


CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT