n Compulaw - 1st Indigenous Digital Law Library
Disable Preloader

CaseLaw

Ngere V. Okuruket (2014) CLR 5(h) (SC)

Judgement delivered on May 9th 2014

Brief

  • Judgment Of A Court
  • Enforcement Of A Judgment
  • Court Orders
  • Leave Of Court
  • Extension Of Time To Appeal
  • Disobedience Court Order
  • Counsel
  • Leave To Appeal
  • Undue Delay
  • Ground Of Appeal
  • Right Of Appeal
  • Jurisdiction
  • Counsel In An Application For Extension Of Time To Appeal
  • Lack Of Jurisdiction
  • Issue Of Jurisdiction
  • Section 27 (2) (a) of the Supreme Court Act
  • Section 233 (2) (a) and (3) of the Constitution
  • Section 287(3) of the Constitution
  • Order 2 Rule 28(1) of the Supreme Court Rules
  • Order 2 Rule 28(14 of the Supreme Court Rules
  • Order 2 Rule 31 of the Supreme Court Rules
  • Order 6 Rule 2(1) of the Supreme Court Rules
  • Order 8 Rule 4 of the Supreme Court Rules

Facts

The facts are these: Ngo is a village in present day Rivers State. In 1970 it had serious problems selecting its village Head. The Chiefs found it very difficult to make a unanimous choice, and so the Government of the now defunct South Eastern State of Nigeria, which included Rivers State appointed, Mr. E. A. Udoh, as sole Commissioner to enquire into the Ngo Village Headship dispute. After hearing from, all sides the Sole Commissioner produced a Report in 1972, The Report is titled, "Report of Enquiry into Ngo Village Headship Dispute". In that Report the sole Commissioner recommended to the Government of the South Eastern State that it recognize the 1st applicant's predecessor as the right person to be made village Head (i.e. the Okan Ama of Ngo.) The Government accepted the Report of the Sole Commissioner. The respondents did not accept the Report. After a considerable length of time the respondents as plaintiffs filed suit No.BHC/41/86. In that suit they claimed the following.

  • i
    A declaration that the Chieftaincy stool of Okan Ama of Ngo Town exists as the known traditional title.
  • ii
    A declaration that the plaintiffs Uwuile family is the rightful family that keeps and maintains the Okan Ama title.
  • iii
    A declaration that the 1st plaintiff is the rightful Okan Ama of Ngo Town.
  • iii
    Perpetual Injunction restraining the defendants by themselves, their servants, their agents or privies from parading themselves as the Okan Ama of Ngo Town and from laying claim to the Chieftaincy stool of Okan Ama of Ngo Town.

The applicants were the defendants. They filed an application before a Rivers State High Court, asking that the suit be dismissed because according to them the court had no jurisdiction to determine the issues. ICHOKU, J presided. On the 9th day of June, 1987 his lordship overruled the objection of the applicants and ruled that he had jurisdiction to hear the case.

On 30th day of May, 1990, ICHOKU, I heard the same parties on the merits and entered judgment for the applicants. He dismissed the respondents' case, and proceeded to rule that he had no jurisdiction to hear the case. Dissatisfied with this judgment plaintiffs/respondents filed an appeal. The Court of Appeal delivered judgment on the 7th day of July 1994. The Court of Appeal allowed the respondents appeal and remitted the case back to the trial court for retrial before another judge. In one breath the learned trial judge ruled that he had jurisdiction to hear the case and in yet another breath he ruled that he does not have jurisdiction to hear the case. The Court of Appeal now, sends the case back for retrial when the issue of jurisdiction is unresolved. This application is brought because the applicants who were respondents in the Court of Appeal are dissatisfied with that court's judgment delivered on the 7th day of July, 1994 ordering a retrial of the case before another judge of the High Court. They seek to appeal against the retrial order.

Issues

  • 1
    Whether the applicants whilst still in disobedience of the orders of the
    • Read More