Disable Preloader

CaseLaw

Yusuf V. Obasanjo (2004) CLR 5(d) (SC)

Judgement delivered on May 7th 2004

Brief

  • Joinder of parties
  • Election petitions
  • Striking out name of party
  • Jurisdiction

Facts

This is yet another interlocutory appeal against the decision of the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) delivered on 17th July, 2003 refusing to strike out the Petition and or its various paragraphs as demanded by the Motions, Applications or Notices of Preliminary Objection filed by some of the Respondents in the Petition.

The Tribunal decided to hear all the motions, applications and objections together. And in a reserved and well considered Ruling the Tribunal in the lead Ruling of Mahmud Mohammed, J.C.A. (which was concurred by all the other 4 Justices) concluded as follows-

  • "In the result, the application filed by the 1st Respondent on 12-6-2003 raising objection to the Petition as contained in paragraphs 1 and 2 of his Reply also filed on 12-6-2003, except for the striking out of paragraphs 13 and 17 of the Petition has failed and the same is hereby dismissed with no order on costs.
  • Similarly the application of the 2nd Respondent filed on 13-6-2003 raising objection to the Petition except for striking out paragraphs 13 and 17 of the Petition has also failed and the same is dismissed with no order on costs.
  • Finally, the preliminary objection by the 40th to 55th Respondents seeking for the striking out of me Petition or dismissing it, has also failed except for the striking out of paragraphs 13 and 17 of the Petition. Consequently, the preliminary objection is also hereby dismissed with no order on costs."

It is abundantly clear from the above that each of the applications or objections succeeded in part and failed in part. Paragraphs 13 and 17 of the Petition were struck-out while all the other prayers or reliefs including that of dismissal and or striking out the Petition were dismissed.

Aggrieved by the Ruling of the Tribunal, both the 1st and 2nd Respondents have appealed separately to this Court.

Issues

  • 1
    Whether or not breaches of the Constitution and Companies and Allied...
    • Read More