N Compulaw - 1st Indigenous Digital Law Library
Disable Preloader

CaseLaw

Odumeru V. AAdenuga (2000) CLR 10(n) (CA)

Brief

  • Declaratory relief
  • Onus of proof in civil cases
  • Pleadings

Facts

This is an appeal from the judgement of the High Court of Lagos State (Coram Silva J.) delivered on 17th June 1999, where in all the reliefs sought by the respondents as plaintiffs were granted. The plaintiffs claimed from the defendants jointly and severally as follows:

  • a
    a declaration that the acts and practice of the 1st – 4th defendants in collecting cash and other legal tender monies (purported on behalf of the 5th defendants) and disbursing same without lodgment in the 5th defendants’ bank account is ultra vires and unlawful
  • b
    an order of perpetual injunction restraining the defendants whether by themselves, agents, or privies from collecting them to receiving payment in cash or other legal tender and directing them to receiving money only by cheque and lodge same in the Association’s account.
  • c
    an order directing the defendants to render a comprehensive account of all monies, cash and other money paid to the 5th defendant and collected by the 1st – 4th defendant purportedly for or on behalf of the 5th defendant from 1st January 1996 to date.
  • d
    an order directing the defendants to summon as extra-ordinary general meeting of the Association on giving not less than 21 days notice to every financial member of the association.
  • e
    an order appointing a reputable and independence firm of accountants to audit the 5th defendant for the entire period the 1st – 4th defendants managed its affairs.

Pleadings were filed and exchanged between the parties. Sequel to the filing of the pleadings the plaintiffs brought an application for an order of interim injunction restraining 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th defendants from collecting cash, bank notes, postal orders or any legal tender, money or money’s worth of whatever value from the members, contributors or other debtors or payees of the 5th defendant until the determination of the motion on notice. The application was granted on 18th February 1998 and the trial Judge accordingly, ordered that the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th defendants be restrained from collecting raw cash, bank notes, postal orders or any legal tender, money or money’s worth from the members, contributors or other debtors or payees of the 5th defendant until the determination of the motion on notice. Of course, the plaintiffs were made to give an undertaking as to damages. An application brought by the defendants./appellants to discharge or vacate the interim order was refused on the 25th June 1998. After some preliminaries both sides decided not to call evidence but resolved to address the court. In a reserved Judgement delivered on 17th June 1999, the trial Judge entered judgement in favour of the plaintiffs. It declared the practice of the 1st – 4th appellants in collecting cash only on behalf of the 5th appellant and disbursing same without lodgement in the 5th appellants’ bank account ultra-vires and unlawful. The 1st – 4th appellants were therefore restrained from collecting or receiving payment in cash on behalf of the 5th appellant.

Dissatisfied, the appellants appealed to the Court of Appeal.

Issues

Was the learned trial Judge right in his application of the rules and...

Read More