NIGERIAN LAW SCHOOL
LAGOS CAMPUS
2015/2016 (NOVEMBER)
SESSION
ANSWERS TO THE TASK ON CIVIL LITIGATION (WEEK 4)
GROUP 2
QUESTION
1
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY, ABUJA
IN
THE GWAGWALADA JUDICIAL DIVISION
HOLDEN
AT GWAGWALADA
Suit No……………..…
Motion
No……….………
BETWEEN
DR
HENRY OBAMA ……………………………..………………. PLAINTIFF
AND
1.
MR. DARLINGTON OKOYE (AKA OSAMA)
2.
CITY LINKS TRANSPORT LTD DEFENDANTS/APPLICANT
AND
ABC
INSURANCE PLC ……………………….PARTY SOUGHT
TO BE JOINED
MOTION
EX PARTE
BROUGHT
PURSUANT TO ORDER 10 RULE 19 HIGH COURT OF THE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY, ABUJA
(CIVIL PROCEDURE) RULES AND UNDER THE INHERENT JURISDICTION OF THIS COURT
TAKE NOTICE that this honourable court will be moved
on the 24th day of November 2015 at the Hour of 9 O’ clock or so soon
thereafter as counsel for the defendant/Applicant will be heard praying this
court for:
1. AN
ORDER EX PARTE to issue Third Party Notice to join ABC Insurance PLC in this
suit
2. AND
FOR SUCH FURTHER ORDER OR ORDERS as the honourable Court may deem fit to make
in the circumstances.
Dated this ……….. day of November 2015
…………………..
Ojoge Chioma
Esq.
Counsel to the defendant/applicant
Group 2 Chambers
Nigerian Law School
Lagos Campus
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY, ABUJA
IN
THE GWAGWALADA JUDICIAL DIVISION
HOLDEN
AT GWAGWALADA
Suit No……………..…
Motion
No……….………
BETWEEN
DR
HENRY OBAMA ……………………………..………………. PLAINTIFF
AND
1.
MR. DARLINGTON OKOYE (AKA OSAMA)
2.
CITY LINKS TRANSPORT LTD DEFENDANTS/APPLICANT
AND
ABC
INSURANCE PLC ……………………….PARTY SOUGHT
TO BE JOINED
AFFIDAVIT
IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION FOR THIRD PARTY NOTICE.
I, Williams Ronke, adult, female, Christian,
Business Woman of No 8, Mbadiwe Ozumba, Victoria island, Lagos, a Nigerian
Citizen, do hereby make oath and state as follows
1. That
I am the Managing Director of the 2nd Defendant/Applicant and by
virtue of which I am conversant with the facts of this case.
2. I
have the consent and authority of my employer to depose to this affidavit
3. I
know as a fact that on the 16th of June 2005 the second Defendant
bought 20 cars and they were insured with the Third party for a comprehensive
cover policy, a copy of the insurance policy is attached and marked as Exhibit
A
4. That
on the 14th February 2013 the first defendant, a driver of one of
the insured vehicles had collision with
the plaintiff’s Mercedez Benz with registration no ABJ 999 BWR
5. The
third party is to indemnify the second defendant of any liability arising from
such accidents as a term in the insurance policy
6. It
is in the interest of Justice that the third party be joined in this suit
7. I
make this statement in good faith believing its content to be true and correct
in accordance with the Oath Act 20004
………………………..
Deponent
Sworn to at the high Court Registry
Gwagwalada
This ………… Day of November 2015
BEFORE
ME
--------------------------------------------
COMMISSIONER
OF OATHS
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY, ABUJA
IN
THE GWAGWALADA JUDICIAL DIVISION
HOLDEN
AT GWAGWALADA
Suit No……………..…
Motion
No……….………
BETWEEN
DR
HENRY OBAMA ……………………………..………………. PLAINTIFF
AND
1.
MR. DARLINGTON OKOYE (AKA OSAMA)
2.
CITY LINKS TRANSPORT LTD DEFENDANTS/APPLICANT
AND
ABC
INSURANCE PLC ………………………. PARTY SOUGHT TO BE JOINED
WRITTEN
ADDRESS IN SUPPORT OF MOTION ON NOTICE
INTRODUCTION
By this application the applicant seeks the leave of
this honourable court to join ABC INSURANCE PLC as the third party in this
suit. The application is supported by an affidavit of 7 Paragraphs deposed to
by Williams Ronke, the Managing Director of the applicant’s company. We rely on
all the paragraphs of the affidavit especially paragraphs 3-6.
BRIEF
FACTS OF THE CASE
My Lord, the 1st and 2nd
defendant were being sued by the plaintiff due to the accident which the
plaintiff was a victim and in which the 1st defendant, acting in
line of his employment with the 2nd defendant as the driver colluded
with the plaintiff. The plaintiff has sued the defendants and deeming it fit
and just to bring the insurance company, the 2nd defendant thus
applies to this honourable Court.
ISSUES
FOR DETERMINATION
The major issue for determination is whether or
not ABC INSURANCE PLC should be joined
as a third party to the case.
LEGAL
ARGUMENT
It is submitted that
ABC INSURANCE PLC is a proper party to this case and that the case for that has
been made by the applicant.
We refer the court to
Paragraphs 3, 4, 5, 6 of the affidavit in support and Exhibit A attached and
submitted on behalf of the applicant that the paragraphs stated above amount to
sufficient proof that it is in the interest of justice to join the third party
to this suit.
Furthermore, we aver
that by virtue of ORDER 10 Rule 18 (1) of the High Court of the Federal Capital
Territory Abuja (Civil Procedures) Rules, 2004 the applicant is entitled to be
indemnified by the third party in case of any liability.
It is further submitted
that this honourable court has the jurisdiction to grant the leave sought by
the Applicant.
CONCLUSION
This honourable court is hereby urged to grant the
application of the 2nd Defendant/ Applicant.
LIST
OF AUTHORITIES
High Court of the
Federal Capital Territory Abuja (Civil Procedures) Rules, 2004
DATED THIS ………….. DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2015
…………………..
Ojoge Chioma
Esq.
Counsel to the defendant/applicant
Group 2 Chambers
Nigerian Law School
Lagos Campus
QUESTION
2
IN
THE NATIONAL AND STATE HOUSES OF ASEMBLY ELECTION PETITION TRIBUNAL
HOLDEN
AT DELTA STATE
ELECTION
INTO THE SENATE OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY FOR ASABA NORTH FEDERAL CONSTITUENCE,
DELTA STATE
Petition No……………
BETWEEN
DR, VINCENT BROWN PETITIONERS/APPLICANT
NATIONAL NIGERIAN PARTY
AND
 |
1. CHIEF BEN OKAGBUE RESPONDENTS
2. INDEPENDENT NATIONAL ELECTORAL COMMISSION
AND
UNITED
CONGRESS PARTY - THE PARTY SOUGHT
TO BE JOINED AS THE 3RD RESPONDENT
MOTION
ON NOTICE
BROUGHT
PURSUANT TO THE INHERENT JURISDICTION OF THIS TRIBUNAL
TAKE NOTICE that this honourable Tribunal will be
moved on the 24th day of November, 2015 at the hour of 9’ O’ clock
in the forenoon or so soon thereafter as counsel for the Petitioner/Applicant
will be heard praying this Tribunal for:
1. AN
ORDER joining Unity Congress Party as Third Respondent in this petition
2. AND
FOR SUCH ORDERS as this |Tribunal may deem fit to make in the circumstance.
Dated this…… Day of November 2015
…………………..
Ojoge Chioma
Esq.
Counsel to the defendant/applicant
Group 2 Chambers
Nigerian Law School
Lagos Campus
FOR SERVICE ON:
1. Chief Ben Okagbue
No 128 Sapele Road, Asaba, Delta State
2. Independent National Electoral Commission
20, Maitama Abuja
3. United Congress Party
25, Takoradi crescent, Wuse Zone 1, Abuja
IN
THE NATIONAL AND STATE HOUSES OF ASEMBLY ELECTION PETITION TRIBUNAL
HOLDEN
AT DELTA STATE
ELECTION
INTO THE SENATE OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY FOR ASABA NORTH FEDERAL CONSTITUENCE,
DELTA STATE
Petition No……………
BETWEEN
DR, VINCENT BROWN PETITIONERS/APPLICANT
NATIONAL NIGERIAN PARTY
AND
 |
1. CHIEF BEN OKAGBUE RESPONDENTS
2. INDEPENDENT NATIONAL ELECTORAL COMMISSION
AND
UNITED
CONGRESS PARTY - THE PARTY SOUGHT
TO BE JOINED AS THE 3RD RESPONDENT
AFFIDAVIT
IN SUPPORT OF MOTION ON NOTICE
I, Dr, Vincent Brown, Adult, Male, Christian,
Medical Doctor and a citizen of Nigeria hereby make and depose to this Oath and
state as follows:
1. That
I am the 1st Petitioner/Applicant in this matter and by virtue of
which I am conversant with the facts of this case
2. I
have the authority and consent of the 2nd Petitioner/Applicant to
depose to this affidavit
3. The
1st Respondent contested the senatorial election under the platform of the Unity Congress Party and was
returned as the winner
4. The
fourth Respondent need to be joined in this petition so that the judgment of
the Tribunal will be binding on it.
5. It
is in the interest of justice to grant this application.
6. I
make this statement in good faith believing its content to be true and correct
in accordance with the Oath Act 2004
………………………..
Deponent
Sworn to at the Tribunal Registry
Asaba
This ………… Day of November 2015
BEFORE
ME
--------------------------------------------
COMMISSIONER
FOR OATHS
IN
THE NATIONAL AND STATE HOUSES OF ASEMBLY ELECTION PETITION TRIBUNAL
HOLDEN
AT DELTA STATE
ELECTION
INTO THE SENATE OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY FOR ASABA NORTH FEDERAL CONSTITUENCE,
DELTA STATE
Petition No……………
BETWEEN
DR, VINCENT BROWN PETITIONERS/APPLICANT
NATIONAL NIGERIAN PARTY
AND
|
1. CHIEF BEN OKAGBUE RESPONDENTS
2. INDEPENDENT NATIONAL ELECTORAL COMMISSION
AND
UNITED
CONGRESS PARTY - THE PARTY SOUGHT
TO BE JOINED AS THE 3RD RESPONDENT
WRITTEN
ADDRESS IN SUPPORT OF MOTION ON NOTICE
INTRODUCTION
By this application the applicant seeks the leave of
this honourable court to join UNITED CONGRESS PARTY as a necessary party in
this suit and also to join them as a respondent in this suit. The application is
supported by an affidavit of 6 Paragraphs deposed to by the first petitioner in
the suit, We rely on all the paragraphs of the affidavit especially paragraphs
3-5.
BRIEF
FACTS OF THE CASE
My Lord, this is a suit that arise out of election
matters in which the petitioner is challenging the election that brought in the
first respondent on various grounds which includes substantial non compliance
with the Electoral Act 2010 as amended, as regards the conduct of the election
amongst other things.
ISSUES
FOR DETERMINATION
The major issue for determination is whether or
not UNITED CONGRESS PARTY as a necessary
party in this suit
LEGAL
ARGUMENT
My Lord, it is trite
that election petition case is sui generis and as such, the attitude of the
Tribunal, although to do substantial justice may be vitiated if necessary
parties to the suit were not joined. This is the clear position of the law and
has been restated severally by the Courts in Nigeria. Most especially, your
Leaned brothers in the Supreme Court in HOPE DEMOCRATIC PARTY v. INEC (2009)
3-4 SC 106 warned severally of dangers of not suing the proper party to the
suit as it may result in striking out the suit for being incompetent. This was
also the position of the law as was held in OGBORU v. IBORI (2004) 7 NWLR (PT.
871) 192.
Based on this position
my Lord, without trying to restate the fact as was expressly state in the
affidavit in support of the motion and as such my Lord, we pray this Honourable
Tribunal to accede to the prayers of the applicant and allow the party sought
to be joined (United Congress Party) to be joined so that substantial justice
would be done as to the best of our belief, the presence of United Congress
Party in this suit is so important as it will aid this Tribunal, the petitioner
as well as the respondents to be properly heard without let or hindrance.
CONCLUSION
This honourable Tribunal is hereby urged to grant
the application of the petitioner/applicant.
LIST
OF AUTHORITIES
Electoral Act 2010
HOPE DEMOCRATIC PARTY v. INEC (2009) 3-4 SC 106
OGBORU v. IBORI (2004) 7 NWLR (PT. 871) 192.
DATED THIS ………….. DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2015
…………………..
Ojoge Chioma
Esq.
Counsel to the defendant/applicant
Group 2 Chambers
Nigerian Law School
Lagos Campus
QUESTION
3
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF LAGOS STATE
IN
THE IKEJA JUDICIAL DIVISION
HOLDEN
AT IKEJA
SUIT NO…….........
BETWEEN
1. 
Alhaji Asamu Ola
Alhaji Asamu Ola
2. Chief
Dede Sanyaolu (suing for themselves CLAIMANTS/APPLICANTS
and on behalf of the Odofin Family)
AND
Chief Mogaji Okechukwu ............................. DEFENDANT
MOTION EX-PARTE
BROUGHT
PURSUANT TO ORDER 13 RULE 12 OF THE HIGH COURT OF LAGOS STATE (CIVIL
PROCEDURES) RULES 2012 AND UNDER THE INHERENT JURISDICTION OF THIS HONORABLE
COURT.
TAKE NOTICE that this
honourable court will be moved on the ....... day of November 2015 at the hour
of 9 o’clock in the forenoon or so soon thereafter as counsel for the
claimant/applicant will be heard praying this court for :
1. AN
ORDER OF this honourable court granting leave to the Applicant to sue for
themselves and on behalf of the Odofin’s family.
2. AND
FOR SUCH FURTHER ORDERS as this court may deem fit to make in the
circumstances.
Dated this....... day
of November, 2015.
…………………..
Ojoge Chioma
Esq.
Counsel to the defendant/applicant
Group 2 Chambers
Nigerian Law School
Lagos Campus
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF LAGOS STATE
IN
THE IKEJA JUDICIAL DIVISION
HOLDEN
AT IKEJA
SUIT
NO…….........
BETWEEN
1. Alhaji Asamu Ola
Alhaji Asamu Ola
2. Chief
Dede Sanyaolu (suing for themselves CLAIMANTS/APPLICANTS
and on behalf of the Odofin Family)
AND
Chief Mogaji Okechukwu ............................. DEFENDANT
AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF MOTION
I, Alhaji Asamu Ola,
Adult, Male, Muslim, Medical Doctor and a Nigerian Citizen of No. 4, Ikotun
Lagos do hereby make oath and state as follows:
1. That
I am a member of the Odofin family House of Ikotun Lagos State and by virtue of
which i am conversant with the facts deposed to.
2. I
have the authority and consent of members of the Odofin family to depose to
this affidavit.
3. That
the 2nd Claimant/Applicant is also a member of the Odofin family of
Ikotun Lagos State.
4. The
Applicants will be able to prosecute the matter to a logical conclusion if the
Application is granted.
5. The
Claimants/Applicants are willing to act as the representatives of the Odofin
family in the matter.
6. It
is in the interest of justice to grant this application.
7. I
make this statement in good faith believing its contents to be true and correct
accordance with the Oaths Act.
_________________
Deponent
SWORN TO AT THE HIGH
COURT REGISTRY, LAGOS.
THIS .......... DAY OF
......................... 2015.
BEFORE
ME
....................................
Commissioner
for Oaths.
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF LAGOS STATE
IN
THE IKEJA JUDICIAL DIVISION
HOLDEN
AT IKEJA
SUIT
NO…….........
BETWEEN
1. Alhaji Asamu Ola
Alhaji Asamu Ola
2. Chief
Dede Sanyaolu (suing for themselves CLAIMANTS/APPLICANTS
and on behalf of the Odofin Family)
AND
Chief Mogaji Okechukwu ............................. DEFENDANT
WRITTEN ADDRESS
INTRODUCTION:
By this Application,
the Applicant seeks the leave of this Honourable Court to prosecute this matter
in a representative capacity. The Application is supported by an Affidavit of 7
paragraphs deposed to by the 1st Applicant. We rely on all paragraphs
of the Affidavit especially paragraghs 3-6.
ISSUE FOR DETERMINATION
The major issue for
determination is
1. Whether
the Applicant has made out a case for leave to be granted him to sue in a
representative capacity.
LEGAL ARGUMENT
It is submitted that
the Applicant that has made out a case for leave to be granted him to prosecute
this matter as a Claimant in a representative capacity.
We refer this court to
paragraphs 3, 4, 5 of the Affidavit in support and Exhibit ‘A’ attached and
submit on behalf of the Applicant that the paragraphs stated above amounts to
sufficient proof that the Applicant has obtained the authority and consent of
the members of the family to commence the present action.
It is further submitted
that the Honourable Court has the jurisdiction to grant the relief sought by
the Applicant. The Applicant rely on the following authorities:
THE
ADMINISTRATORS/EXECUTORS OF THE ESTATE OF GEN. SANI ABACHA (DECEASED) v. SAMUEL
DAVID EKE SPIFF & ORS (2009) LPELR SC.344/2002
ALHAJI RAIMI EDU v.
ODAN COMMUNITY, ADO FAMILY and OKOKOMAIKO COMMUNITY (1980) 8-11 SC 103
CONCLUSION
This Honourable Court
is therefore urged to grant the Application of the Claimant/Applicant.
LIST OF AUTHORITIES
THE
ADMINISTRATORS/EXECUTORS OF THE ESTATE OF GEN. SANI ABACHA (DECEASED) v. SAMUEL
DAVID EKE SPIFF & ORS (2009) LPELR SC.344/2002
ALHAJI RAIMI EDU v.
ODAN COMMUNITY, ADO FAMILY and OKOKOMAIKO COMMUNITY (1980) 8-11 SC 103
DATED THIS ........ DAY
OF NOVEMBER, 2015.
…………………..
Ojoge Chioma
Esq.
Counsel to the defendant/applicant
Group 2 Chambers
Nigerian Law School
Lagos Campus
QUESTION
4
CASE
I
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF LAGOS STATE
IN
THE IGBOSERE JUDICIAL DIVISION
HOLDEN
AT IGBOSERE
Suit No………
BETWEEN
MRS KAYUBA ADA…………………………………………………..….PLAINTIFF
AND
AGRICULTURAL BANK PLC………………………………….………..DEFENDANT
CASE
2
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF ENUGU STATE
IN
THE ENUGU JUDICIAL DIVISION
HOLDEN
AT ENUGU
Suit No………
BETWEEN
MR OKE MADU ……………….PLAINTIFF
AND
MR ORJI
……………..DEFENDANT
CASE
3
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY, ABUJA
IN
THE GWAGWALADA JUDICIAL DIVISION
HOLDEN
AT GWAGWALADA
Suit No………
BETWEEN
DR HENRY OBAMA………………. CLAIMANT
AND
1. MR DARLINGTON OKOYE (AKA OSAM)……. FIRST DEFENDANT
2. CITY LINKS TRANSPORT LTD……………… SECOND
DEFENDANT/APPLICANT
CASE
4
IN
THE NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL COURT
IN
THE LAGOS JUDICIAL DIVISION
HOLDEN
AT LAGOS
Suit No……………
Between
Kunle Komolafe ………………………. Complainant
And
1. First Atlantic Petroleum Company Nig. Ltd.
……………………… Defendant
CASE
5
CASE
6
IN
THE NATIONAL AND STATE HOUSES OF ASEMBLY ELECTION PETITION TRIBUNAL
HOLDEN
AT DELTA STATE
ELECTION
INTO THE SENATE OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY FOR ASABA NORTH FEDERAL CONSTITUENCE,
DELTA STATE
Petition No……………
BETWEEN
DR, VINCENT BROWN PETITIONERS/APPLICANT
NATIONAL NIGERIAN PARTY
AND
|
1. CHIEF BEN OKAGBUE RESPONDENTS
2. INDEPENDENT NATIONAL ELECTORAL COMMISSION
AND
UNITED
CONGRESS PARTY - THE PARTY SOUGHT
TO BE JOINED AS THE 3RD RESPONDENT
QUESTION
5
5a . The difference between third party procedure
and joinders of parties.
In
third party proceedings, a defendant claims against a person not already a
party in the case but who may bear eventual liability either in whole or in
part. The party seeking to be joined is not originally a party to the suit but
it appears necessary that he be joined as it may appear that such third party
may be affected from the outcome of the suit. Joinder of parties occurs where
two or more persons may be joined in one suit as plaintiffs to prosecute a
common right or relief, either jointly or severally. The parties must have a
right to relief, jointly, severally or in the alternative and such right to
relief must be in respect of the same transaction or in a series of
transaction.
A
joinder of parties occurs in relation to plaintiffs while in third party
proceedings, it is related to the defendants.
In
third part proceedings, a foreign party is introduced, that is, the one who
originally was not a party in the suit while in joinder of parties, no novel
party is introduced.
5b. Differences between class action and
representative action.
A
class action is one which occurs where the parties cannot be ascertained or
where ascertained cannot be found or where found, it may appear necessary that
someone represents them. A
representative action is one where a person or group of persons bring an action
on behalf of himself and others. It occurs usually between persons of the same
family, associates or individual.
In
a representative action, it is desirable under Rule 8 that the leave of court
be sought and obtained though failure to do same does not vitiate the
proceedings but a class action does not require a leave of court.
In
representative action, the parties are identifiable and ascertainable, e.g.
members of a family, associations and communities to mention but a few. In a
class action, the injured persons are hardly identifiable or ascertainable.
In
representative action, an application for leave is made by way of motion ex
parte supported by affidavit, disclosing the facts surrounding the
representative action.
5c. The ethical issues in suing and joinder of the
wrong parties in all action.
Incompetency: The ethical issues in suing and
joinder of wrong parties in an action is to the effect that such lawyer will be
seen as incompetent in representing his client. This is provided for in Rule 1
of the Rules of Professional Conduct which states that:
‘A Lawyer shall uphold and observe the rule of law,
promote and Foster the cause of justice, maintain a high standard of
professional conduct, and Shall not engage in any conduct which is unbecoming
of a legal practitioner’.
Suing wrongly and joining parties wrongly based on
this rule amounts to a gross abuse of court processes.
The effect of such wrongful joinder of parties will lead to the wrongfully
joined party’s name being struck out by
a competent court and in event that there is no other party to question in the
suit, the whole suit will be struck out.
No comments:
Post a Comment