3PLR – PROF. AYODELE AWOJOBI V. DR. SAMUEL OSAIGBOVO OGBEMUDIA

POLICY, PRACTICE AND PUBLISHING, LAW REPORTS  3PLR

[PDF copy of this judgment can be sent to your email for N300 only. Just order through lawnigeria@gmail.com and info@lawnigeria.com or text 07067102097]

PROF. AYODELE AWOJOBI

V.

DR. SAMUEL OSAIGBOVO OGBEMUDIA

SUPREME COURT OF NIGERIA, LAGOS

MONDAY, AUGUST 22, 1983

SC. 69/1983

3PLR/1983/11  (SC)

OTHER CITATIONS

(1983) 8 SC 92

 

BEFORE THEIR LORDSHIPS 

 

GEORGE SODEINDE SOWEMIMO, JSC

MOHAMMED BELLO, JSC

ANDREWS OTUTU OBASEKI, JSC

KAYODE ESO, JSC

ANTHONY NNAEMEZIE ANIAGOLU, JSC

MUHAMMADU LAWAL UWAIS, JSC

 

REPRESENTATION

Appellant in person

M.A. Apampa for Chief F.R.A. Williams SAN for Respondent.

MAIN ISSUES

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE

 

SOWEMIMO, JSC. Having heard the appellant on his appeal, I do not intend to call on counsel for the respondent. This appeal is not brought under sub-section (1) or (2) of section 213 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1979. There is, therefore, no merit in this appeal and it is hereby dismissed with n300 costs to the respondent.

 

BELLO, JSC. Having withdrawn his appeal in the Federal Court of Appeal and that Court struck it out accordingly, the appellant has no right of appeal to this Court against the decision of the Federal Court of Appeal. The purported appeal in this Court is incompetent and it should be dismissed with N300 costs to the respondent.

 

OBASEKI, JSC. Having heard the appellant, I think this appeal is totally misconceived. It is also admitted by him that he applied to withdraw his appeal (reference to be more accurate) before the Federal Court of Appeal and on that ground, the Federal Court of Appeal struck out his appeal. A few hours after the striking out of his appeal at his request by the Federal Court of Appeal, he filed a notice of appeal against the order made at his request.

 

All effort made by this court to get the appellant to appreciate the utter futility of his appeal does not seem to have yielded any result. There is no sense or logic in filing an appeal against a decision allowing an appellant to withdraw his appeal on his application. This appeal is an abuse of the process of the court. I find no merit whatsoever in the appeal and I hereby dismiss it with N300.00 costs to the respondent.

 

ESO, JSC. There is no merit in this appeal. There is no jurisdiction in this Court as the appeal is for a decision of the Federal Court of Appeal which was in favour of the appellant.

 

N300.00 costs to the respondent.

 

ANIAGOLU, JSC. I consider this appeal incompetent. The appellant had an appeal before the Federal Court of Appeal on 27th July, 1983. He withdrew the appeal and the Federal Court of Appeal, in consequence, struck it out. Then the same day the appellant appealed to this Court against the order striking out the appeal – an order which was made on his own application. He says he had to do so because the Federal Court of Appeal felt bound by the decision of this Court in BRONIK’s Case on the issue of jurisdiction and that he submits that BRONIK’S Case was wrongly decided by this Court. He therefore had to appeal so that this Court could over-rule the BRONIK’S Case. There is no precedent for what the appellant is doing. I made it clear to him that the courts of this country, and much less so this Court, cannot be turned into venues for moot trials.

 

Speaking for myself, I consider the frequency with which this appellant goes in and out of our courts as bringing him dange­rously within the meaning of a vexatious litigant who should be restrained by the courts on the principles and jurisdiction laid down in LAWRENCE v. NORREYS (1890) 15 App. Cas. 210, and HAGGARD v. FELICIER FRERRES (1892) A.C. 61.

 

The appellant’s frequent actions in courts have now become an abuse of the process of the courts.

 

In the instant appeal, this Court, clearly, has no jurisdiction to entertain ­this matter, which must be dismissed. It is a matter for regret that the highest court in the land should be subjected to entertain a frivolous matter of the type of this appeal, in the face of very weighty matters, concer­ning parties aggrieved, with which this Court has to deal, in the interest of the Nation, within the Constitution of Nigeria.

 

Having been dismissed I must award N300.00 costs in favour of the respondent. I will not call upon Mr. Apampa, for the respondent, to reply. The appeal stands dismissed,

 

NNAMANI, JSC. There is no doubt in my mind that the appeal is not properly before us. The appellant had withdrawn his appeal before the Federal Court of Appeal which struck it out. The appellant cannot therefore come within the purview of section 213 subsections (1) and (2) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1979. In any case having thoroughly studied all the papers filed, I am of the view that the purported appeal is totally misconceived and lacks merit. I hereby dismiss it with N300 costs to the respondent.

 

UWAIS, JSC. I agree that this appeal is utterly devoid of’-merit and that it should be dismissed. The appellant withdrew his case before the Federal Court of Appeal which was a reference from the Federal High Court. The case was struck-out even though it should have been dismissed in accordance with Order 3 rule 18(5) of the Federal Court of Appeal Rules 1981. It is against that ruling of the-Federal Court of Appeal that the appellant came before us. Surely the appellant cannot be heard to say that he was aggrieved by the decision of the Federal Court of Appeal because it was given in accordance with his application. Furthermore there is no decision of the Federal Court of Appeal against which the appellant could have appealed to this Court under the provisions of S. 213 of the Constitution.

 

Accordingly the appeal is dismissed with N300.00 costs to the respondent.

 

 

error: Our Content is protected!! Contact us to get the resources...
Subscribe!