May 5, 2025
Legalpedia Citation: (2014) Legalpedia (CA) 81893 In the Court of Appeal HOLDEN AT ILORIN Wed Dec 3, 2014 Suit Number: CA/IL/M.63/2014 CORAM PARTIES MR. GODWIN JOHN& ORS APPELLANTS […]
CORAM
PARTIES
MR. GODWIN JOHN& ORS APPELLANTS
1. ALFA BUREMOH AYINLA (JUDGMENT CREDITOR/RESPONDENT)
2. TOYIN ABDULKAREEM(JUDGMENT DEBTOR/RESPONDENT)
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 243(a) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended), Section 24(4) of the Court of Appeal Act 1976 (as amended), Order 7 Rule 10(1) and (2) of the Court of Appeal Rules of 2011 and the inherent power of this Court, the Applicants by motion on notice, sought for the following orders; an order of this Honourable court extending the time within which the Applicants may file their application for leave to appeal as interested parties against the judgment of the High court of Justice of Kwara State, Ilorin Judicial Division in suit No. KWS/138/2007 between Alfa Buremoh Ayinla, and Mr. Toyin Abdulkareem as parties affected and having an interest in the matter; an order the court granting leave to the Applicants to appeal as interested parties against the judgment of the High court of Justice of Kwara State, an order of this Honourable Court extending the time within which the Applicants may file notice and grounds of appeal as parties affected/interested in the matter against the judgment of the High Court of Justice of Kwara State, Ilorin Judicial Division. The application is supported by a 31 paragraph affidavit to which various processes including the Notice of Appeal and the Ruling of Kwara State High Court (herein referred to as the Lower Court), refusing leave to appeal as interested parties were exhibited as Exhibits A – F, and a further and Better affidavit. The 1st and 2nd Respondents opposed the application contending that the Applicants have no business coming into the matter at this stage, the matter being purely a dispute on the ownership of land between the 1st and 2nd Respondents. They consequently urged the court to dismiss the application.
HELD
Appeal Dismissed.
ISSUES
Whether the said application before the Lower Court, in view of the fact that ‘leave’ at first was not sought within the time allowed to appeal (as provided in Section 24(4) of the Court of Appeal Act 2004 as amended) contained the “trinity prayer” as enunciated in the case of OWENA BANK PLC VS. N.S.E. LTD. (l997) 8 NWLR (PT.515) and in RE: MADAKI (1996) 7 NWLR (PT.459) 153?
RATIONES DECIDENDI
APPEAL, PARTY, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE
LEAVE TO APPEAL AS AN INTERESTED PARTY – WHETHER THERE EXISTS PRESCRIBED PERIOD WITHIN WHICH TO FILE AN APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL AS AN INTERESTED PARTY
“This is because the 1st prayer sought by the applicant before the Lower Court through their Counsel is misconceived in that no law prescribes any period within which an interested party may bring his application for leave to appeal as interested party in a matter. SEE In Re: Madaki (1996) 7 NWLR (PT.459) 153 AT 164 and Ojora Vs. Agip Plc (2005) ALL F.W.L.R. (PT.267) 1433.”
APPEAL, PARTY, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE
LEAVE TO APPEAL – TIME WITHIN WHICH A PARTY WOULD APPLY FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL
“Now by Section 25(2) (a) of the Court of Appeal Act No.43 of 1976 (as amended), an appellant or any person desirous of appealing shall give notice of his appeal within three (3) months of the date of final decision, and by several decision of this Court, a person applying for leave to appeal must do so within the statutory period of 3 months prescribed. If he is out of time, he must apply for extension of time within which to apply for leave to appeal, otherwise, the leave sought will be refused.”
APPEAL, PARTY, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE
LEAVE TO APPEAL AS AN INTERESTED PARTY – WHETHER AN APPEAL BY A PARTY INTERESTED CAN SUCCCED SOLELY ON THE TRINITY PRAYERS
“In the present case, the applicants are hopelessly out of time in applying for leave to appeal, and what then ought to have been done by the present applicants was first to apply for:-
1. Leave to appeal under Section 243 of the 1999 Constitution of Nigeria (as amended) as persons having an interest in the case, and under the rules of this Court. In other word, the applicants must first ask for leave to be made a party in the case. Then,
2. Extension of time within which to apply for leave to appeal.
3. Leave to appeal; and
4. Extension of time within which to file notice and grounds of appeal.
I wish to point out here that the last three prayers (i.e. 2, 3, and 4 prayers) are wholly dependent on the first prayer. That the other prayers cannot succeed unless the applicants are first made party in the case, pursuant to the relevant section of the Constitution. So it is not just the ‘trinity’ prayers that the applicants should seek. Their first prayer should be for ‘leave to be made a party in the case or for leave to appeal under Section 243(a) of the said Constitution as persons having an interest in the case. Then the other ‘trinity’ prayers in the above quotation will follow if the application is made outside the time prescribed for appearing under Section 24(2) of the Court of Appeal Act 2011. But the applicants did not ask first for that prayer. Failure to seek and obtain firstly, such prayer, the other prayers cannot succeed.”
APPEAL, PARTY, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE
RIGHT TO APPEAL– WHETHER AN INTERESTED PARTY HAS A RIGHT TO APPEAL AGAINST A DECISION OF COURT WHICH HE WAS NOT A PARTY
“I would only add that S. 243 (a) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria only grants to an interested party a right to appeal against a decision of a court which he was not a party. This right can only be enjoyed only on application, if granted; the beneficiary could then be made a party in this case, a party in the appeal before this court.”
CASES CITED
Not Available
STATUTES REFERRED TO
1. Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria1999 (as amended)
2. Court of Appeal Act No.43 of 1976 (as amended)
3. Court of Appeal Rules 2011