Disable Preloader

CaseLaw

Ucha V. Onwe (2011) CLR 1(i) (SC)

Judgement delivered on January 28th 2011

Brief

  • S.285(1)(a) 1999 Constitution
  • Pre-election matters

Facts

The action which has culminated in this appeal before us was commenced at the National Assembly Governorship and Legislative Houses Election Petition Tribunal Abakaliki in Ebonyi State by way of a petition dated and filed on the 19th of May, 2007. The Petitioner, Dr. Emmanuel Onwe was the Appellant at the Court below and the 1st Respondent in this appeal before us. Senator Julius Ali Ucha was the 1st Respondent at the trial Election Tribunal and at the Court of Appeal. He is the Appellant in the appeal before us.

1st Respondent sought three declaratory reliefs, two specific orders and orders of injunctions against his substitution by the 1st and 4th Respondents.

In support of the petition, the Petitioner/1st Respondent deposed to a 37 paragraph affidavit statement of which paragraphs 17-28 are not in the record. The Petitioner/1st Respondent also listed the details of 20 documents on which he intended to rely at the hearing of the petition.

The Appellant as 1st Respondent at the Tribunal filed a 24 paragraphs reply to the petition. He also listed six documents on which he intended to rely at the hearing of the petition. In addition, he also filed a 19 paragraphs Statement on Oath.

The 2nd and 3rd Respondents also filed a 19 paragraph reply to the petition. Also the 4th Respondent filed a Reply of 27 paragraphs.

The 2nd and 3rd Respondents also filed a 19 paragraph reply to the petition. Also the 4th Respondent filed a Reply of 27 paragraphs.

He also indicated that he will call 4 witnesses during the trial of the petition.

The 5th Respondent who is the Clerk of the National Assembly did not file a Reply to the petition.

In reaction to the Replies filed by the Respondents to the petition, the Petitioner/1st Respondent filed answers to the said replies.

At the completion of pleadings and the pre-trial proceedings, the trial of the petition commenced on Tuesday, the 24th of July, 2007. When trial completed, the parties through their Counsel submitted and exchanged written addresses which they adopted in the proceedings on the 22nd of August, 2007.

In its judgment on the 13th of September, 2007, the Tribunal dismissed the petition.

Aggrieved with the decision of the Tribunal, the Petitioner/1st Respondent appealed to the Court of Appeal. The 4th Respondent also filed an Appeal against an earlier Ruling of the Tribunal delivered on the 2nd of July, 2007. There were thus before the Court of Appeal two appeals, that is, the main appeal and the interlocutory appeal. The main appeal was CA/E/EPT/18/2007. The interlocutory appeal was CA/E/EPT/18A/2007. In its judgment delivered on the 16th of July, 2010, the Interlocutory Appeal was dismissed. The main appeal was however allowed.

Aggrieved with the decision of the Court of Appeal, the Appellant/1st Respondent to the petition appealed to the Supreme Court. He filed two appeals. The first was against the decision of the Court of Appeal on the interlocutory appeal and the second was against the decision on the main appeal.

Issues

  • 1
    Whether, having regard to the provisions of Section 285 and other...
Read More