n Compulaw - 1st Indigenous Digital Law Library
Disable Preloader

CaseLaw

Orker Jev V. Iyortyom (2014) CLR 5(f) (SC)

Judgement delivered on May 30th 2014

Brief

  • Originating summons
  • Interpretation of Statutory provisions and Construction of documents
  • Primary elections
  • Nomination and/or sponsorship of candidate
  • Interpretation of documents
  • Jurisdiction
  • Leave to appeal
  • Grounds of appeal
  • Preliminary objection
  • Raising Issue Suo Motu
  • Section 24(2) of the Court of Appeal Act
  • Section 87(9) Electoral Act 2010 (as amended)
  • Section 141 of the Electoral Act 2010 (as amended)
  • Section 251 1999 Constitution
  • Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution
  • Section 36 (1) of the 1999 Constitution
  • Order 10 Rule 1 of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2011

Facts

The facts of the case giving birth to this appeal may be summarized as follows: On 12th January, 2011, the 2nd Appellant conducted the primary elections to choose its candidates for various elective offices in Nigeria at the general elections scheduled for April, 2011. On that same day, the Action Congress of Nigeria (now All Progressive Congress (APC 2nd Appellant) conducted its primary election in Buruku Federal Constituency of Benue State to choose its House of Representatives candidate for that constituency. The primary election was contested amongst the 1st Appellant, the 1st Respondent and one John Tine.

At the end of the primary election, the 3rd Respondent, Engr. Mozeh as head of the Electoral Committee of the 2nd Appellant, declared the 1st Respondent as the winner having polled 8,030 against the 1st Appellant and John Tine who scored 1,316 and 494 votes respectively.

In spite of the result of the primary election, the 2nd Appellant declared the 1st Appellant as the winner. The 1st Respondent being dissatisfied with the conduct of the primary election, filed suit No. FHC/CS/19/2011 at the Federal High Court, Makurdi challenging the nomination of the 1st Appellant and the subsequent submission of his name to the 2nd Respondent wherein he prayed for the following reliefs:

  • 1
    Declaration that the 2nd defendant has breached Article 21,3,b, of the Constitution of the 2nd defendant in that the 2nd defendant has forwarded the name of the 1st defendant as candidate of the 2nd defendant for the April 2011 general elections for the House of Representatives to the 3rd defendant whereas, the plaintiff won the primaries for the said office as conducted by the 2nd defendant.
  • 2
    A declaration that the forwarding of the name of 1st defendant to 3rd defendant by the 2nd defendant as the candidate for the House of Representative for Buruku Federal Constituency for the forthcoming General elections and the corresponding Act of 3r defendant by accepting, listing and publishing the 1st defendant as the 2nd defendant's candidate for the Federal House of Representatives Buruku Federal Constituency is illegal, Unconstitutional null and void and of no effect.
  • 3
    An order of perpetual injunction restraining 1st defendant from parading himself as the 2nd defendant's candidate for the Federal House of Representative Buruku Federal Constituency in respect of the forthcoming election into the Federal House of Representative.
  • 4
    An order of perpetual injunction restraining the 2nd and 3 defendants from recognizing and dealing with the 1st defendant as the 2nd defendant's candidate for the House of Representative Buruku Federal Constituency in respect of the forthcoming Election into the Federal House of Representative.
  • 5
    An order directing the 2nd and 3rd defendants to take all steps, actions including listing the name of the plaintiff as the 2nd defendant's candidate for the House of Representative Buruku Federal Constituency in respect of the forthcoming elections into the Federal House of Representative and to allow the plaintiff contest the election into the House of Representative Buruku Federal Constituency in the forthcoming General elections on the Party platform of 2nd defendant.

Upon being served with the 1st Respondent's originating processes, the Appellants filed their defence at the Federal High Court which heard the suit on its merit and gave judgment on 21st March, 2011, declaring the 1st Respondent as the winner of the said primary election and directing the 2nd Appellant to forward the name of the 1st Respondent to the 2nd Respondent as its candidate for the general election.

The Appellants, being dissatisfied with the judgment of the Trial Court, appealed to the Court of Appeal which dismissed the said appeal, and unanimously affirmed the judgment of the Federal High Court.

Again, the Appellants are not satisfied with the judgment of the lower court. They filed Notice of Appeal

Issues

  • 1
    Was the Court of Appeal right when it struck out Appellants' Grounds 1, 3...
    • Read More