n Compulaw - 1st Indigenous Digital Law Library
Disable Preloader

CaseLaw

Lokpobiri Vs. Ogola (2015) CLR 10(f) (SC)

Judgement delivered on November 2nd 2015

Brief

  • Jurisdiction
  • Interpretation of statute
  • Exclusive and Concurrent jurisdiction
  • Abuse of court process
  • Pre election matters
  • Federal High Court Jurisdiction
  • Kakih vs. PDP
  • PDP v Sylva

Facts

On the 28th day of January, 2015, appellant caused to be filed at the Federal High Court, Yenegoa, Bayelsa State, an Originating Summons in suit No. FHC/YNG/CS/03/2015 for the determination of the following questions:

  • 1
    Whether by virtue of Section 31(2) (4) (5) and (6) of the Electoral Act 2010 (as amended); Article 50 (9) of the Peoples' Democratic Party Constitution 2012 (as amended), the 3rd Defendant is not a person disqualified to take part in and contest the primary election conducted by the 2nd defendant at Sagbama town on 7th December, 2014 Senatorial District for the general election slated to hold in February or any other month in 2015 as may be fixed by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC)?
  • 2
    Whether by virtue of Section 87 (4) (c) (ii) of the Electoral Act 2010 (as amended); Articles 31 (2) (i), 50 (1) (2) (c) of the Peoples' Democratic Party Constitution 2012 (as amended) and Articles A (i) and (ii) the 2nd Defendant's Electoral Guidelines for Primary Elections 2014, the 2nd Defendant is not bound to submit the name of the Plaintiff to the 1st defendant as the duly elected candidate for the Bayelsa West Senatorial District to contest the 2015 general election having polled the highest number of votes in the primary election held at Sagbama Town on 7th December, 2014?
  • 3
    Whether by virtue of Section 87 (4) (c) (ii) of the Electoral Act 2010 (as amended); Articles 31(2)(i), 50 (1)(2)(c) of the Peoples' Democratic Party Constitution 2nd 2012 (as amended), and Articles A (i) and (ii) the 2nd Defendant's Electoral Guidelines for Primary Elections 2014, the result or the outcome of the 2nd Defendant's Senatorial Primary Election conducted on 7th December, 2014 at Sagbama Town, the 2nd Defendant can or could rightly replace the Plaintiff with the 3rd Defendant who lost out in the said primary election?
  • 4
    Whether in view of the fact that the 3rd Defendant who was not qualified to contest the primary elections held at Sagbama Town on 7th December, 2014 and was not elected the Candidate for the Bayelsa West Senatorial District, the submission of the 3rd defendant to the 1st defendant by the 2nd Defendant as its candidate for the purpose of contesting the general election slated to hold in February or any other month in 2015 as may be fixed by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) is not ultra vires, unconstitutional, unlawful, illegal, null and void and of no effect whatsoever?
  • 5
    Whether by virtue of section 31 (2) (4) and (5) of the Electoral Act, 2010 (as amended) and Exhibits HIOL 12(Sic,13) the 3rd defendant having breached the mandatory provisions of the law ought not to be barred from contesting the general election slated to hold in February or any other month in 2015 as may be fixed by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) as candidate of the 2nd defendant?
  • 6
    Whether in the event that the election (Sic) the general election slated to hold in February or any other month in 2015 had held prior to the determination of this suit, and questions 1-5 above are answered in favour of the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff would not step into or be deemed to step into the shoes of the 3rd Defendant?" (See pages 3 - 4 of vol. 1 of the record.)

The Appellant also sought the following reliefs by the said Originating Summons:

  • 1
    A DECLARATION that by virtue of section 31(2) (4) (5) and (6) of the Electoral Act 2010 (as amended); Article 50 (9) of the People’s Democratic Party Constitution 2012 (as amended) the 3rd Defendant is a person not qualified to take part in and contest the primary election conducted by the 2nd defendant at Sagbama town on December, 2014 to nominate or select a candidate for the Bayelsa West Senatorial District for the general election slated to hold in February or any other month in 2015 as may be fixed by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
  • 2
    A DECLARATION that the Plaintiff is the rightful candidate of the 2nd Defendant for the Bayelsa West Senatorial District in the general election slated to hold in February or any such month in 2015, having secured (Sic. The highest number of votes at the primary election conducted by the 2nd defendant at the Sagbama town on 7th December, 2014, having regard to the provisions of section 87(4) (c) (I) (II) and articles 31(2) (i), 50 (1) (2) (c) of the Peoples' Democratic Party Constitution 2012 (as amended) and Articles A (i) (II) of the 2nd Defendant's Electoral Guidelines for Primary Elections 2014.
  • 3
    A DECLARATION that the information supplied by the 3rd defendant in INEC FORM FC 001 sworn to at the Court Registry, Federal Capital Territory Abuja and the documents attached thereto is false and untenable and thus renders Form FC 001 useless, unreliable, worthless and of no effect.
  • 4
    AN ORDER of this Honourable Court nullifying and/or setting aside INEC Form No. 001 sworn to by the 3rd defendant at the High Court Registry, Federal Capital Territory, Abuja and the documents attached thereto for containing information that is false and untrue.
  • 5
    AN ORDER of this Honourable Court disqualifying the 3rd Defendant from contesting the general election slated to hold in February or any other month in 2015 as may be fixed by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) as the candidate of the 2nd defendant.
  • 6
    AN ORDER directing the 1st Defendant to accept forthwith the plaintiff as the 2nd Defendant's candidate to contest the general elections (Sic.) slated to hold in February or any other month in 2015 as may be fixed by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
  • 7
    AN ORDER Putting the Plaintiff into the shoes of the 3rd Defendant in the General Election slated to hold in February or any other month in 2015 for the Bayelsa West Senatorial District in the National Assembly in the event that the Election had taken place before the determination of this suit.
  • 8
    AN ORDER restraining the 1st, 2nd and 3rd Defendants, their servants, agents, privies, assigns or any other person howsoever described from further recognizing and or according recognition to the 3rd Defendant as the 2nd Defendant's candidate for the Bayelsa West Senatorial District in the general election slated to hold in February or any other month in 2015 as may be fixed by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
  • 9
    AN ORDER restraining the 3rd Defendant from parading or holding himself out as the 2nd Defendant's candidate for the Bayelsa West Senatorial District in the general election slated to hold in February or any other month in 2015 as may be fixed by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) or enjoying or seeking to enjoy any of the rights, privileges and or benefits connected with or related to the candidacy of the Bayelsa West Senatorial District.
  • 10
    AN ORDER for accelerated hearing of the originating summons having regard to the facts and circumstances of this case.
  • 11
    AND FOR SUCH FURTHER OR OTHER ORDERS this Honourable Court may deem fit to make in the circumstances of this case. (See pages 5-7 of vol. 1 of the record.)".

Many processes were filed by the parties in reaction to the suit including a motion filed on the 18th day of February, 2015 by the appellant praying for an order of court dismissing the suit for want of jurisdiction or for being in abuse of process of the court. It should be noted that the 1st respondent in this appeal had earlier filed Suit No. FHC/ABJ/1011/2014 at the Federal High Court, Abuja on the same subject matter against the present appellant, and the 2nd and 3rd respondents which action was still pending. There was also another motion challenging the jurisdiction of the Federal High Court, Yenegoa on the same grounds as those of appellant, filed by 2nd respondent on the 20th day of February, 2015. Both objections were taken together by the trial court and ruled upon on the 16th day of March, 2015.

In the ruling, the trial court found no merit in the applications and consequently dismissed same. The court held that the suit does not constitute an abuse of process of court and that the action is within the jurisdiction of the Federal High Court to hear and determine.

The 1st respondent was dissatisfied with that ruling and consequently appealed against same to the Court of Appeal, Holden at Port Harcourt in appeal No.CA/PH/96/2015 which appeal was heard on the 19th day of May, 2015. On the 19th day of June, 2015, the lower court delivered a judgment on the appeal in which it allowed the appeal by holding that appellant's main claims, earlier reproduced in this judgment, are not directed at the Federal Government or its agency and as such outside the purview of the provisions of section 251(1) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, as amended (hereinafter referred to as the 1999 Constitution, as amended), and that the suit in question amounts to forum shopping and consequently an abuse of court process.

The instant appeal is therefore against the said judgment,

Issues

  • 1
    Whether in view of section 251(1) of the Constitution of the Federal...
    • Read More