TAIYE OSHOBOJA VS ALH. SURAKATU J. AMUDA & ORS - Legalpedia | The Complete Lawyer - Research | Productivity | Health

TAIYE OSHOBOJA VS ALH. SURAKATU J. AMUDA & ORS

OBA R. A. A. OYEDIRAN VS. OBA ALEBIOSU II & ORS
July 10, 2025
SOLOMON AKPAN VS THE STATE
July 10, 2025
OBA R. A. A. OYEDIRAN VS. OBA ALEBIOSU II & ORS
July 10, 2025
SOLOMON AKPAN VS THE STATE
July 10, 2025
Show all

TAIYE OSHOBOJA VS ALH. SURAKATU J. AMUDA & ORS

Legalpedia Citation: (1992-07) Legalpedia 75721 (SC)

In the Supreme Court of Nigeria

Holden At Abuja

Fri Jul 17, 1992

Suit Number: SC 273/1989

CORAM


KUTIGI JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

UWAIS JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

WALI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

OLATAWURA, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

OMO JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT


PARTIES


TAIYE OSHOBOJA

APPELLANTS 


ALH. SURAKATU J. AMUDA & ORS

RESPONDENTS 


AREA(S) OF LAW



SUMMARY OF FACTS

The appellant was the defendant in an action which was brought by the respondents, as plaintiffs, in the High Court of Lagos state sitting at Ikeja claiming that the judgment of the Court given by Taylor, J., (as he then was) on the 2nd day of June, 1958 be set aside on the ground that no statement of defence had been filed.

 


HELD


The Supreme Court held that the assumption of jurisdiction under section 16 of the Court of Appeal Act by the court of appeal was clearly an error. The High Court, having regard to the fact that no statement of defence had been filed, could not proceed to a decision on the merits of the case.

 


ISSUES


Whether the Court of Appeal had jurisdiction to enter judgment for the plaintiffs on their Amended Statement of Claim after finding that the trial Judge was wrong in holding that the Amended Statement of Claim did not disclose reasonable cause of action.

Can High Court decide a case in the light of Its Civil Procedure Rules without pleadings but merely on a Statement of Claim when the defendant has not defaulted filing a Statement of Defence? The answer is simply in the negative.

 


RATIONES DECIDENDI


POWER OF A COURT OF APPEAL TO DEAL WITH ANY CASE BEFORE IT


AFRICAN CONTINENTAL BANK LTD. CALABER VS JOSEPH AGBANYM   1960   FSC 267/1959   [1960] NSCC 12

“There is no doubt that section 16 has given the Court of Appeal amplitude of power to deal with any case before it on appeal. The power includes the jurisdiction of a court of first instaPOWER OF A COURT OF APPEAL TO DEAL WITH ANY CASE BEFORE IT

“There is no doubt that section 16 has given the Court of Appeal amplitude of power to deal with any case before it on appeal. The power includes the jurisdiction of a court of first instance and in the present case the jurisdiction of the High court. This is not in doubt whatsoever”. Per UWAIS, JSC

nce and in the present case the jurisdiction of the High court. This is not in doubt whatsoever”. Per UWAIS, JSC

 


POWER OF A COURT OF APPEAL TO DEAL WITH ANY CASE BEFORE IT


It follows therefore that the Court of Appeal cannot also decide a case on a statement of claim when the statement of defence is yet to be filed. To do so will amount to not only breaching the rules of pleadings but also overreaching the defendant and thus occasioning a miscarriage of justice. The importance of pleadings in our adversary system of administration of justice cannot be overlooked. Far it is when issues are joined that a case can proceed on trial. Even then, when evidence is given which is not supported by the pleadings, it goes to no issue and will be disregarded. All these essentials cannot be sacrificed on the altar of expediency.” Per UWAIS, JSC

 


CASES CITED


Bello v. A. G., Oyo State, (1986)5 NWLR. (Pt. 45)828 at p. 876A

 


STATUTES REFERRED TO


The Court of Appeal Act

 


CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT

Comments are closed.