Disable Preloader

CaseLaw

DAUDA V. AG LAGOS STATE (2011) CLR 5(A) (SC)

Judgement delivered on May 20th 2011

Brief

  • Estoppel per rem judicata
  • Issue estoppel
  • Res judicata
  • Academic questions
  • Public archieves Act
  • Chieftaincy matters

Facts

This action was commenced at the Ikeja Judicial Division of the High Court of Lagos State by a writ of summons dated the 14th of July, 1978 by the Plaintiffs who were Respondents at the Court below and are the Appellants in this Court. Pleadings were filed and exchanged. Both the Statement of Claim and the Statement of Defence were amended. In the concluding paragraphs of the Amended Statement of Claim dated the 7TH of March, 1988 and filed on the 10th of March, 1988, the Plaintiffs/ Appellants claimed against the Defendants who are Respondents herein, the following reliefs:-

  • 1
    A Declaration that the Elete Chieftaincy Family are the only people entitled to create and/or confer Chieftaincy titles for all or any of the villages within the Elete Division.
  • 2
    A Declaration that the purported approval of the 3rd Defendant's recommendations of the 4th, 5th and 6th defendant as the Baale of Ilemba Hausa, Balogun of Hausa and the ElembaAwori respectively, by the Chieftaincy Committee of the Badagry Local Government at its meeting of 5th May, 1987 is irregularly unconstitutional, incompetent, null and void and of no effect whatsoever.
  • 3
    Perpetual injunction restraining the lst and 2nd Defendants by themselves, their servants, agents or privies or howsoever otherwise from acting upon the 3rd Defendant's recommendation in installing or recognising or taking any steps in recognising or installing or causing to be installed or recognized the 4th, 5th, and 6th Defendant as the Baale of IlembaAwori respectively.
  • 4
    An order restraining the 4th,5th and 6th Defendants or any other candidates recommended by the 3rd Defendant by themselves, their servants, agents or privies howsoever otherwise from holding themselves out as the Baale of llemba Hausa, Balogun of Ilemba Hausa and Baale of IlembaAwori or any other Chieftaincy office of the Elete Division or wearing any regalia of Baale of Ilemba Hausa, Balogun of Ilemba Hausa and Baale of ElembaAwori or any Chieftaincy office of the Elete Division or permitting themselves or taking any steps to be installed or recognised as the Baale of llemba Hausa, Balogun of Ilemba Hausa and Baale of IlembaAwori or any other chieftaincy office of the Elete Division or performing or causing to be performed any act or function or ceremonial connected with their installation as the Baale of llemba Hausa, Balogun of llemba Hausa and Baale of IlembaAwori or any other chieftaincy office of the Elete Division following from the 3rd Defendant's recommendation.

The matter then proceeded to trial which involved the testimony of 9 witnesses for the Plaintiffs and 4 witnesses for the Defence. There were quite a number of exhibits including, Exhibits "5" and "9" which were previous court judgments of the High Court and Court of Appeal respectively.

In his judgment on the 12th of January, 1990, the learned trial judge M. O. Onalaja J. (as he then was) granted the 1st and 2nd reliefs for declaration. And while he refused the 3rd relief for injunction, he granted the 4th injunctive relief.

Dissatisfied with the aforesaid judgment, the Defendants proceeded an appeal to the Court below. In its judgment on the 8th of July, 1999, the appeal was allowed. The judgment of the trial court was set aside. And in its place was substituted a judgment dismissing the Plaintiffs' claim. The Plaintiffs were aggrieved and have come on appeal to this Court

Issues

  • 1
    Whether the lower court correctly identified/formulated title issues for...
  • Read More