Disable Preloader

CaseLaw

Williams V. Akintunde (1995) CLR 3 (M) (CA)

Brief

  • LPA 1976 S.23A whether constitutional
  • Status of Legal practitioners Act and ouster clauses/strong>
  • Grounds of Appeal
  • Respondents notice

Facts

Respondents filed an action in a representative capacity on behalf of themselves and members of the Ikeja NBA against the appellants on behalf of themselves and members of the Body of Benchers caretaker committee of the NBA and the Body of Benches claiming against the appellants certain declaratory and injunctive reliefs relating generally to the affairs of the NBA and in particular the Legal practitioners (Amendment) Decree No 21 of 1993. The respondents sought and obtained an interim injunction against the appellants in the following terms:

  • a
    restraining the 1st - 3rd defendants by themselves their agents, servants and/or privies from interfering in any manner whatsoever with the internal affairs of the NBA.
  • b
    restraining the 1st-4th (sic 3rd) defendants whether by themselves, their agents, servants and/or privies from preventing the 4th-6th defendants in the discharge of their legal obligation as the trustees of the NBA.

Appellants, dissatisfied, appealed contending that the trial court lacked Jurisdiction to make the order. Upon the appeal, the appellate court raised suo motu the constitutionality of the new section 23A of LPA contained in the Legal practitioners Amendment Decree No 21 of 1993 and invited all the counsel to address It on the issue.

Issues

  • 1
    Whether the High court had jurisdiction to entertain the suit...
  • Read More