AJAYI V. LAGOS CITY COUNCIL
Pages | 340-350 |
AJAYI V. LAGOS CITY COUNCIL
340
AJAYI V. LAGOS CITY COUNCIL
5
G. 0. K. AJAYI
APPELLANT
V
LAGOS CITY COUNCIL
RESPONDENT
10
SUIT NO. SC 178/1968
SUPREME COURT OF NIGERIA
LEWIS,
J.S.C.
MADARIKAN,
J.S.C.
FATAI-WILLIAMS, J.S.C.
15
14th November, 1969.
Professional Ethics - Legal Practitioner - Suing for fees - Implied authority from
past conduct for Town Clerk to brief counsel on behalf of defendant under
S.170(2) of Lagos Local Government Act, 1959 unless otherwise directed -
20
Majority of court thought power to brief implied from S.170(2) itself if Town
Clerk defending in place of defendant - Plaintiff cannot appear for defendant
after Tribunal refused to allow him in that capacity and defendant not liable
if plaintiff only acting "in interest of' defendant unless specially authorised
by defendant - 500 guineas as fee for briefing and appearance on first day
25
of hearing at Tribunal allowed.
ISSUES:
1.
Does a Town Clerk have the power to brief a counsel on behalf of the Lagos
City Council?
30
2.
Whether a Town Clerk is entitled to represent the Lagos City Council at a
Tribunal of Enquiry.
FACTS:
The plaintiff who had been briefed to appear for the Council by the Town Clerk
brought an action in Court to collect his professional fees. The defendant con-
35
tended that the Town Clerk had no power to brief an outside Solicitor for the Coun-
cil and that even if he did the plaintiff did not in fact appear for the Council at the
tribunal after the 6th of July. The High Court dismissed his claim. He appealed
to the Supreme Court.
HELD:
40
1.
The passages from the evidence of the 4th Plaintiff witness make it abundantly
clear that it was the practice of the Town Clerk to brief counsel on behalf of the
Lagos City Council and that he used a vote for legal expenses under his control
to pay fees for those services when incurred.
2.
Exhibit "U" supported the view that the Town Clerk did this as a matter of practice
45
and he wrote after briefing Counsel to the Chairman Lagos City Council
Caretaker Committee to inform him that he had done so.
3.
The important thing, however, was that the Lagos City Council saw fit at the
hearing to call no rebutting evidence whatever, that this story of past practice
was untrue.
50
4.
The Supreme Court was satisfied that the Plaintiff had made out his case that
the Town Clerk had implied authority to brief Counsel under Section 170(2)
unless there was a specific direction from the Council to the contrary which
was never suggested was the case here.
To continue reading
Request your trial