Compulaw - 1st Indigenous Digital Law Library

Brief

Oath Taking – Proof of Custom in relation to
Customary Arbitration and Oath Taking – Nature of
Hearsay evidence and Eye witness evidence
Oath Taking – Whether recognised under customary law arbitration
Section 66 of the Evidence Act 2011
Section 133(1) of the Evidence Act 2011 as amended
Section 16(1) of the Evidence Act 2011
Section 16(2) of the Evidence Act 2011

Facts

At the High Court of Anambra State, (Trial Court, for short), the respondents in this appeal, as plaintiffs, took out a Writ of Summons against the appellant herein, (as defendants). They sought the following declaratory and injunctive reliefs:

a
A declaration that the land in dispute is the exclusive property of the plaintiffs and are entitled to the customary right of occupancy in and over the said land called "Ishiekpe;"
b
A mandatory injunctive order on the defendants to rebuild the damaged house of the first plaintiff which they destroyed;
c
N10,000 (Ten Thousand Naira only) (sic) damages for trespass;
d
A perpetual injunction to restrain the defendants by themselves, agents, privies, servants, workmen or whomsoever from further acts of waste and trespass on the land.

Upon the settlement and exchange of pleadings, trial commenced on October 19, 2005. Five witnesses testified on behalf of the plaintiffs. On the other hand, the defendants called four witnesses. The trial Court, in its judgement, found for the respondents, (plaintiffs, as they then were). The defendants at the Trial Court, (appellants at the Lower Court), approached the Court of Appeal, Enugu Division, (Lower Court, for short), which Court, upon dismissing the defendants/appellants' appeal, affirmed the Trial Court's judgement.

They (the defendants/appellants), further, appealed to this Court entreating it to determine their two issues: issues which the respondents adopted in their brief. Before returning to these issues, a factual background of the case may not be out of place. They (the defendants/appellants), further, appealed to this Court entreating it to determine their two issues: issues which the respondents adopted in their brief. Before returning to these issues, a factual background of the case may not be out of place.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

As per their Amended Statement of Claim, the respondents made the case that they are members of the Chibunze family in Egbeagu village, Amansea in Awka Local Government area of Anambra State of Nigeria. They and the appellants are of the Umuofuonye kindred in Egbeagu village, Amansea. They claimed to be the customary occupiers of the land in Amansea. They made the case that the land in dispute was part of the family land of Umuofuonye kindred when in about 1940, one Emmanuel Uba, a member of Umuogbocha kindred in Egbeagu village, Amansea, trespassed into the Isi-ekpe land of Umuofuonye kindred. Chibunze, the respondents' father challenged Emmanuel Uba's trespassory acts.

The Egbeagu village intervened in the dispute and invited both Umuogbocha and Umuofuony kindreds for arbitration. The Egbeagu village decided that Umuogbocha kindred should bring a juju and place it on the land in dispute for the Umuofuonye kindred to swear by removing same.

They further claimed that their father, Chibunze, without the support of Umuofuonye kindred - the other members of the kindred, because of the fear of being killed by the Ngene Olineru juju, stayed away, rose to the occasion. On account of this, their father, Chibunze, became the exclusive owner of the Isiekpe land. He, Chibunze, thereafter exercised diverse acts of possession on the land such as farming and planting agricultural palms thereon. Before his death, he, Chibunze, allotted portions of the land in dispute to his male children. In 2004, the appellants pulled down and burnt the bungalows of the first plaintiff, now deceased, bungalows allotted to him by their father, Chibunze. This prompted their action in Court.

The defendants/appellants, on their part, maintained that the land in dispute forms part of the entire land which was founded by Ofuonye, the great ancestor of the appellants and the respondents. The said Ofuonye, during his lifetime, gave birth to sons who, in turn, gave birth to the present kindred known as Umuofuonye in Egbeagu village of Amansea. The land in dispute, according to them, known as and called Isiekpe is the family land of Umuofuonye kindred.

Their further case was that sometime in 1940, a dispute arose between the Umuogbocha and the Umuofuonye families over the Isiekpe land. The Egbeagu village decided that Umuofuonye should take oath for Umuogbocha family. The appellants maintained that the other members of Umuofuonye family assisted the respondents' father to remove the juju placed on the Isiekpe land by the Umuogbocha kindred. They averred that, after the oath-taking exercise, the respondents' father never claimed exclusive ownership of the Isiekpe land as other members of the Umuofuonye family continued to farm on the land collectively unhindered.

As indicated earlier, following the affirmation of the trial Court's judgement, they (the defendants/appellants), further, appealed to this Court.

Umeadi & Ors V. Chibunze (2020) CLR 3(e) (SC)

Judgement delivered on March 13th 2020

Brief

Facts

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

Issues