ABASI & ORS V. ESIN

• Pages: 166-171

166



NIGERIAN SUPREME COURT CASES

[1963] N.S.C.C.

What the Judge should not do except with the agreement of the parties, and then

only if good cause for it is shown, it is isolate a single issue of fact and try it apart

from the rest of the case. It may appear on occasion, as no doubt it did to the trial

Judge in this case, that time will be saved by taking such a course, but in ordinary

circumstances, as Lord Evershed said in the

Windsor Refrigerator

case, "the shor-

test cut so attempted inevitably turns out to be the longest way round", and even if

the judge forms the view at an early stage that the plaintiff's case contains some

fatal weakness, he should not dismiss it without having heard the whole of it. In

Ro-

timi v. Adegunle

(1959) 4 F.S.C. 19, an attempt to expedite matters by trying a pre-

liminary issue of fact led to the parties having to incure the expense and delay of



10

a further trial, and the same must happen in this case.

I would allow the appeal, set aside the judgment of the High Court and remit

the case to the High Court for trial

de novo

by another Judge. Though the respond-

ent was not responsible for the course adopted in the court below, he tried to up-

hold the court's decision, and the appellant must have costs of the appeal asessed



15

at 46 guineas. Costs of the first hearing in the High Court should be costs in the

cause.

Taylor, F.J.:

I concur.

Bairamian, F.J.: I

concur.

Appeal allowed: order for re-trial



20

by another Judge.

ABASE & ORS V. ESIN



25

1.

ATANG EDEM ABASI

2.

ASUQUO EFFIONG OF EYO ABASI



APPELLANTS



30

3.

OKON AKPE

V

DR. ESIN ANWANA ESIN (for himself

and as representing the Esin

Family of Eyo Abasi)



RESPONDENTS



35

SUIT NO. FSC 443/1961

FEDERAL SUPREME COURT.

BRETT,



F.J.

TAYLOR,



F.J.

BAIRAMIAN,



F.J.



40

24th May, 1963.

Land Law - Acquisition by notice by Government - Dispute between parties -

which party entitled to compensation - jurisdiction of native court to entertain

- s.10 of Public Lands Acquisition Ordinance - Proper Procedure to determine



45

party entitled to land and compensation.

ISSUES:

1.

Whether a Native Court has the jurisdiction to entertain a dispute related to land

acquired by Government.



50

2.

Under what circumstances will the former Supreme Court (now High Court)

have the jurisdiction to entertain a suit based on a dispute as to title of land

acquired by Government.?