OGUNTAYO VS ADELAJA

CORAM

N TOBI, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT

I F OGBUAGU, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT

J O OGEBE, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT

O. O. ADEKEYE, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT

J A FABIYI, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT

PARTIES

OTUNBA ADESESAN OGUNTAYO (ORADEREMO OF IJEBU IFE)

APPELLANTS 

1. PRINCE FATAl ADELAJA

2. CHIEF A. DUDUYEMI ODUNUGA(JEWO-Olu of IJEBU-IFE)

3. CHIEF SEGUN OSIBOTE(ALORAN OF IJEBU-IFE )

4. CHIEF F. JAIYEOLA ADEKOYA(ODELE OF IJEBU-IFE)(OLIWO OF IJEBU-IFE)

5. CHIEF AJADI OGUNDEKO

6. CHIEF B. ADELEYE OSIBADEJO

7. CHIEF AJADI OGUNDEKO

8. CHIEF SHOSE(AGBON OKE-IFE OF IJEBU-IFE

9. THE MILITARY ADMINISTRATOR OF OGUN STATE

10. THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL AND COMMISSIONER FOR JUSTICE, OGUN STATE

RESPONDENTS 

AREA(S) OF LAW

FINDINGS OF FACT – EVIDENCE –  MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The 1st respondent as plaintiff sued the appellant for declaration that the 1st defendant was not eligible to be nominated as Ajalorun of Ijebu-Ife. The trial court dismissed the 1st respondent’s claim. His appeal to the Court of Appeal was upheld and a retrial ordered. Dissatisfied, the appellant has appealed and the 1st respondent cross-appealed.

HELD

Appeal allowed and judgment of the Court of Appeal set aside

ISSUES

(a) Whether in the face of the provisions of Section 34 of the Evidence Act and the evidence before the trial Court, the Court of Appeal was right in holding that the learned trial Judge breached the rule of natural justice and was wrong in law in rejecting the proceedings in Suit No. HCJ/6/85 in evidence. This issue is distilled from Grounds 2, 3 and 4 of the grounds of appeal.

(b) Whether in all the circumstances of the case, the Court of Appeal was right in ordering a re-trial of the case? This issue is distilled from ground 5 of the grounds of appeal.

RATIONES DECIDENDI

WHEN EVIDENCE TAKEN IN EARLIER TRIALS WILL BE RELEVANT

Evidence of a witness taken in an earlier proceedings is not relevant in a later trial except for the purpose of discrediting such a witness in cross-examination and for that purpose only. Per OGEBE JSC

CUSTOMARY LAW IS A QUESTION OF FACT THAT MUST BE PROVED

Customary law is a question of fact to be proved by evidence. Hence a person who alleged the existence of a particular custom must adduce sufficient evidence in support and establish its existence to the satisfaction of the court. Per Tobi, JSC

WHEN MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE WILL OCCUR

Miscarriage of justice occurs when the court fails or refuses to follow its rules and arrives at a decision which is prejudicial or inconsistent with the legal rights of a party. Per Tobi, JSC

CASES CITED

1. L.S.D.P V. Adold/stamm Int. Ltd. 1994 7 NWLR(Pt. 357)545

2. MOJEKWU V. IWUCHUKWU (2004) 11 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 883) 196

3. Agbai & ors. v Okogbue(1991) 3 NWLR (Pt.204) 391

4. Onagoruwa v The State (1993) 7 NWLR (Pt. 303) 49

STATUTES REFERRED TO

NONE

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT