WOME MOSES, ESQ v. NIGERIAN BAR ASSOCIATION

CORAM

KUDIRAT MOTONMORI OLATOKUNBO KEKERE-EKUN

PARTIES

WOME MOSES, ESQ APPELLANTS

NIGERIAN BAR ASSOCIATION (NBA) RESPONDENTS

AREA(S) OF LAW

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The Appellant, a Legal Practitioner practicing in Port Harcourt, Rivers State, represented a Member of the Rumu-Amadi Family at the High Court of Rivers State, in a case involving family land. The Appellant’s client lost at the High Court and he appealed to Court of Appeal, which led to a Petition written by the Representatives of the Family to the Chairman of the Respondent [the NBA]’s Port-Harcourt Branch. In the Petition, it was alleged that while the matter was on appeal, the Appellant partitioned the family land and sold plots of land; and he misrepresented himself as the Family’s lawyer and began negotiating more sales without valid authority. The Petition was referred to the Disciplinary Committee of the NBA, who after its investigations, held that the Appellant tampered with the subject of litigation, contrary to Rules 30 and 32(k) of the Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners 2007. Armed with the said Report of its Disciplinary Committee, the Respondent filed a Complaint against the Appellant at the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee [LPDC].

In its Final Direction, the LPDC found him guilty of infamous conduct in the course of performing his duty as a Legal Practitioner, and it directed the Chief Registrar of the Supreme Court to strike out the name of the Appellant from the roll of Legal Practitioners. It is against this decision that the Appellant has brought this appeal. The Respondent raised a Notice of Preliminary Objection praying that the Notice of Appeal be struck out and dismissed for being incompetent as the court lacks jurisdiction to hear the matter or alternatively, strike out the suit because NBA is not a juristic person and cannot sue or be sued eo nomine.

HELD

Preliminary Objection Sustained, Appeal Struck Out

ISSUES

Whether (it) is a juristic person known to law that can be sued “and it is its contention that it is not a juristic person but a juridical person, so it can only sue or be sued in a representative capacity

RATIONES DECIDENDI

PRELIMINARY OBJECTION – WHETHER A PRELIMINARY OBJECTION CAN BE RAISED WHERE A PARTY IS NOT A LEGAL PERSON CAPABLE OF EXERCISING ANY LEGAL RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE LAW

“The Preliminary Objection takes priority because it is well settled that where one Party is not a legal person capable of exercising any legal rights and obligations under the law, the other Party can always raise this fact as a preliminary objection, which if upheld, normally leads to the action being struck out – see Admin/Execs, Estate, Abacha V. Eke-Spiff & Ors. (2009) 7 NWLR (Pt. 1139) 975C. In other words, Respondent’s Objection must be considered first.”

ARTIFICIAL PERSON – DEFINITION OF AN ARTIFICIAL PERSON

“An artificial person is defined in Black’s Law Dictionary. 9th Ed., as:
An entity, such as a corporation, created by law and given certain legal rights and duties of a human being, a being, real or imaginary, who for the purpose of legal reasoning is treated more or a less as a human being.”

JURISTIC PERSON – WHETHER THE LEGAL PRACTITIONERS DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE IS A JURISTIC PERSON

“The NBA is not a juristic person but the same cannot be said for the LPDC, which was created by the Legal Practitioners Act. So, the LPDC is a legal person, which means it can sue and be sued in its name – see LPDC V. Fawehinmi (1985)2 NWLR (Pt. 7) 300 SC.”

COMPLAINT AGAINST A LEGAL PRACTITIONER- APPROPRIATE BODY TO ENTERTAIN A COMPLAINT AGAINST A LEGAL PRACTITIONER

“By virtue of Rules 2A (2) and 3 of the Legal Practitioners (Disciplinary Committee) Rules, as amended, a complaint received by any of the persons specified in Rule 2A (1), shall be forwarded to the NBA, which shall cause the complaint to be investigated.”

THE NIGERIAN BAR ASSOCIATION- STEP TO BE TAKEN BY THE NIGERIAN BAR ASSOCIATION WHERE A PRIMA CASE HAS BEEN MADE AGAINST A LEGAL PRACTITIONER

“In any case where “in pursuance of Section 10 (1) of the Legal Practitioners Act”, the NBA is of the opinion that a prima facie case is shown against a legal practitioner, the NBA shall forward a report of such a case to the Secretary of the LPDC. The said Section 10 (1) (b) of the Legal Practitioners Act provides:
The Body of Benchers shall be responsible for –
(b) The exercise of disciplinary jurisdiction over members of the legal profession and over students seeking to become legal practitioners.”
–

LEGAL PRACTITIONERS DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE- DUTY OF THE LEGAL PRACTITIONERS DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE

“And Section 11(1) of the said Legal Practitioners Act provides that:
There shall be a committee of the Body of Benchers to be known as the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee (in this Act referred to as “the Disciplinary Committee”) which shall be charged with the duty of considering and determining any case where it is alleged that a person whose name is on the Roll has misbehaved in his capacity as a legal practitioner or should for any other reason be the subject of proceedings under this Act.”

ACTION- WHEN IS AN ACTION PROPERLY CONSTITUTED?

“It is well settled that for an action to be properly constituted so as to vest jurisdiction in the Court to adjudicate on the matter, there must be a competent Plaintiff and a competent Defendant, and where either of them is not a legal person, the action is liable to be struck out for being incompetent – see Agbonmagbe Bank V. General Manager, G. B. Ollivant Ltd. & Anor. (1961) All NLR 116. In this case, there is only one Appellant and one Respondent, who is a non-juristic person, and as it cannot be sued in its name, it must be struck out as a Party to this Appeal. It also follows as a matter of course that the Appeal itself must be struck out as well. The outcome would have been different if the LPDC was also made a Party to the Appeal along with the NBA or even on its own (the cases referred to above had LPDC as a Party to the Appeal). The position of the law is that once there is a Plaintiff or Defendant with requisite juristic capacity to sue and be sued, such an action would be properly constituted as to Parties, and the action cannot be defeated on the ground of want of capacity to sue and be sued – see Nigerian Nurses Assoc. & Anor V. A-G., Fed. (1981) 11 – 12 SC 1”.

THE NIGERIAN BAR ASSOCIATION- LEGAL STATUS OF THE NIGERIAN BAR ASSOCIATION

“The respondent is simply the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), which by law is not a juristic person as it can neither sue nor be sued in a Court of law – see the case of Fawehinmi vs Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) (No 2) (1989) 2 NWLR (pt. 105) 558 at 595.”

CASES CITED

None

STATUTES REFERRED TO

1. Legal Practitioners (Disciplinary Committee) Rules, as amended

2. Legal Practitioners Act 2004 as amended

3. Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners 2007

WOME MOSES, ESQ v. NIGERIAN BAR ASSOCIATION

MALEL VENTURES LIMITED V. PETROLEUM EQUALIZATION FUND MANAGEMENT BOARD

BARR. AYODELE MUSIBAU KUSAMOTU VS. ALL PROGRESSIVES CONGRESS & ORS

MALEL VENTURES LIMITED V. PETROLEUM EQUALIZATION FUND MANAGEMENT BOARD

BARR. AYODELE MUSIBAU KUSAMOTU VS. ALL PROGRESSIVES CONGRESS & ORS

WOME MOSES, ESQ v. NIGERIAN BAR ASSOCIATION

Legalpedia Citation: (2019) Legalpedia (SC) 38370

In the Supreme Court of Nigeria

HOLDEN AT ABUJA

Wed Feb 20, 2019

Suit Number: SC.941/2015

CORAM

PARTIES

AREA(S) OF LAW

SUMMARY OF FACTS

HELD

ISSUES

RATIONES DECIDENDI

PRELIMINARY OBJECTION – WHETHER A PRELIMINARY OBJECTION CAN BE RAISED WHERE A PARTY IS NOT A LEGAL PERSON CAPABLE OF EXERCISING ANY LEGAL RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE LAW

ARTIFICIAL PERSON – DEFINITION OF AN ARTIFICIAL PERSON

JURISTIC PERSON – WHETHER THE LEGAL PRACTITIONERS DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE IS A JURISTIC PERSON

COMPLAINT AGAINST A LEGAL PRACTITIONER- APPROPRIATE BODY TO ENTERTAIN A COMPLAINT AGAINST A LEGAL PRACTITIONER

THE NIGERIAN BAR ASSOCIATION- STEP TO BE TAKEN BY THE NIGERIAN BAR ASSOCIATION WHERE A PRIMA CASE HAS BEEN MADE AGAINST A LEGAL PRACTITIONER

LEGAL PRACTITIONERS DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE- DUTY OF THE LEGAL PRACTITIONERS DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE

ACTION- WHEN IS AN ACTION PROPERLY CONSTITUTED?

THE NIGERIAN BAR ASSOCIATION- LEGAL STATUS OF THE NIGERIAN BAR ASSOCIATION

CASES CITED

STATUTES REFERRED TO

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT

Esther ORIAH

WOME MOSES, ESQ v. NIGERIAN BAR ASSOCIATION

MALEL VENTURES LIMITED V. PETROLEUM EQUALIZATION FUND MANAGEMENT BOARD

BARR. AYODELE MUSIBAU KUSAMOTU VS. ALL PROGRESSIVES CONGRESS & ORS

MALEL VENTURES LIMITED V. PETROLEUM EQUALIZATION FUND MANAGEMENT BOARD

BARR. AYODELE MUSIBAU KUSAMOTU VS. ALL PROGRESSIVES CONGRESS & ORS

Legalpedia Citation: (2019) Legalpedia (SC) 38370

In the Supreme Court of Nigeria

HOLDEN AT ABUJA

Wed Feb 20, 2019

Suit Number: SC.941/2015

CORAM

PARTIES

AREA(S) OF LAW

SUMMARY OF FACTS

HELD

ISSUES

RATIONES DECIDENDI

PRELIMINARY OBJECTION – WHETHER A PRELIMINARY OBJECTION CAN BE RAISED WHERE A PARTY IS NOT A LEGAL PERSON CAPABLE OF EXERCISING ANY LEGAL RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE LAW

ARTIFICIAL PERSON – DEFINITION OF AN ARTIFICIAL PERSON

JURISTIC PERSON – WHETHER THE LEGAL PRACTITIONERS DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE IS A JURISTIC PERSON

COMPLAINT AGAINST A LEGAL PRACTITIONER- APPROPRIATE BODY TO ENTERTAIN A COMPLAINT AGAINST A LEGAL PRACTITIONER

THE NIGERIAN BAR ASSOCIATION- STEP TO BE TAKEN BY THE NIGERIAN BAR ASSOCIATION WHERE A PRIMA CASE HAS BEEN MADE AGAINST A LEGAL PRACTITIONER

LEGAL PRACTITIONERS DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE- DUTY OF THE LEGAL PRACTITIONERS DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE

ACTION- WHEN IS AN ACTION PROPERLY CONSTITUTED?

THE NIGERIAN BAR ASSOCIATION- LEGAL STATUS OF THE NIGERIAN BAR ASSOCIATION

CASES CITED

STATUTES REFERRED TO

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT

Esther ORIAH

Related posts

SURAJUDEEN M. JIMOH V. SAMSON TUNDE OYINLOYE