Judicial Precedents

• Pages: 1234-1340

1234

JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS.

BINDINGNESS OF AUTHORITY.

A dissenting judgment is not the judgment of the Court or Tribunal and it is therefore

not binding. (1) “I wish to quickly state firstly, that adissenting judgment, however powerful,

learned or articulate,is not the judgment of the Court or Tribunaland it is not therefore,

binding. The judgment of the Court or in the case of Tribunal, is themajority judgment.So

saidthe Supreme Court – perTobi, J.S.C., in the case ofOrugbo & Anor.v.Bulara Una &

Ors. (supra)at 30 – 31. I will say however, that an appellate Court can make reference to it and

in fact, agree about a settled principle of law or a sound reasoning and conclusion in the

dissenting judgment and in fact, set aside the majority judgment.” – PerOgbuagu, J.C.A., in

Daggash v. BulamaSuit No. CA/J/152/2003; (2004) 14 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 892) 144 at 247. (2) “I

am also aware that my learned brother, Niki Tobi, J.S.C., in the said case ofOrugbo & anor.

Balara Una & Ors.(supra) stated that a dissenting judgment however powerful, learned and

articulate,is not the judgment of the Court and therefore, not binding since the judgment of the

Court is the majority judgment which is binding. But with the greatest respect, instances

abound, where some majority judgments of the Court of Appeal, have been set aside by this

Court and approval is given to a minority judgment which reflects the justice of the case on

appeal.” – Per Ogbuagu, J.S.C., in Olufeagba v. Abdul-Raheem Suit No. S.C. 76/2007; (2009)

18 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 1173) 384 at 456. (3) “It is well settled that a dissenting judgment, however

powerful, learned and articulate, is not the judgment of the Court; the judgment of the Court is

the majority judgment, which is the binding judgment – seeOrugbo v.Una(2002) 16

N.W.L.R. (Pt. 792) 175 S.C.; Daggash v. Bulama(2004) 14 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 892)

144 & F.G.N. v.Zebra Energy Ltd.(2002) 18 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 798) 162S.C. where Mohammed,

J.S.C., stated as follows at 196 – “I am not unmindful of the judgment of Ogundare, J.S.C.,

inIbrahim’s case[i.e.Ibrahim v. J.S.C., Kaduna State(supra)],wherein he considered the

applicability of contract cases to the privilege provided in the Act.But that is a dissenting

judgment and althoughwellfounded, is not the binding decision on the issue”.(Italics mine).”

– Per Augie, J.C.A., in Awokunle v. N.E.P.A.Suit No. CA/I/184/05; (2007) 15 N.W.L.R. (Pt.

1057) 340 at 351 – 352. (4) “The principle of stare decisismakes only the majority opinion of

a Court rather than the dissenting one binding. SeeDaggash v. Bulama (2004) 14 N.W.L.R.

(Pt. 892) 144.” – Per M.D. Muhammad, J.C.A., in Awokunle v. N.E.P.A.Suit No. CA/I/184/05;

(2007) 15 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 1057) 340 at 356. (5) “Another objection raised by the learned counsel

for the respondent in his oral submission is on issue No. 2. learned counsel urged us to

discountenance issue No. 2 and arguments contained therein in support of the issue because

same is based on the minority judgment of this Court delivered on the 29/6/2006. In the case

of Daggash v. Bulama(2004) 14 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 892) 144at Pp. 247, this Court per Ogbuagu,

J.C.A., (as he then was) held as follows: “A dissenting judgment is not the judgment of the

Court or Tribunal and it is therefore, not binding. An appellate Court may, however, make

reference to it and in fact, agree about a settled principle of law or a sound reasoning and

conclusion in the dissenting judgment and in fact, set aside the majority judgment. (Orugbo v.

Una(2002) 16 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 792) 175referred to) (p. 247, paras G – H).” – Per Abdullahi,

1235

J.C.A., in Kayode v. StateSuit No. CA/IL/C.39/2005; (2008) 1 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 1068) 281 at 298

– 299.

Are lower Courts bound to follow all decisions of higher Courts. “Although lower Courts

are bound to follow the decision of higher Courts, it is not in all cases that the lower Court is

bound to follow all the cases cited before it, it must be seen to be in line with the case at hand.”

– Per Okoro, J.C.A., in C.N. Ekwuogor Invest. (Nig.) Ltd. v. Asco Invest. Ltd. Suit No.

CA/L/589/2006; (2011) 13 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 1265) 565 at 587.

Bindingness of decision of Court of Appeal on itself. “Learned counsel argued in his brief

that the Court of Appeal as an intermediate Court between the High Court and the Supreme

Court is bound by its own decision except in any of the three situations, which he enumerated

at page 12 of the brief. Counsel correctly citedUsman v. Umaru(1992) 7 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 254)

377; Osumanu v. Amadu (1949) 12 W.A.C.A. 437 andU.B.A.v. Taan (1993) 4 N.W.L.R. (Pt.

287) 368. The second situation where the Court of Appeal will not follow its own decision,

counsel submitted, is when the decision cannot stand with the decision of the Supreme Court.

That is the correct legal position and counsel has very well stated it. In other words, where a

previous decision of the Court of Appeal is in conflict with a decision of the Supreme Court,

the Court of Appeal is not bound to follow the decision. As a matter of law, the Court must

follow the decision of the Supreme Court.” – Per Tobi, J.S.C., in Olutola v. UnilorinSuit No.

S.C. 211/1999; (2004) 18 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 905) 416 at 467.

Bindingness of decision of Court until set aside. “The law is certain that a judgment, ruling

or an order of a Court remains extant and binding on all the parties to it until set aside or vacated

either by the Court that gave it or by an appellate Court on appeal against such decision. See

(1)Senator Christiana N.D. Anyanwu v. Hon. Independent Chiedoziem Ogunewe & Ors (2014)

8 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 1410) 437at 470 D – E where Kekere-Ekun, J.S.C., said: “As rightly observed

by learned counsel for 2ndrespondent, there is no appeal against these concurring findings of

fact. It is a settled principle of law that a decision on any point of law or fact not appealed

against is deemed to have been conceded by the party against whom it was decided and it

remains valid and binding on all parties.” (2) Alhaji (Chief) S.D. Akere & Ors. v. The Governor

of Oyo State & Ors(2012) 12 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 1314) 240at 278 F – G perOnnoghen, J.S.C.,

who said: “In the circumstance; it is very clear and as settled in along line of cases by this Court

that a decision of a Court of Tribunal not appealed against is deemed accepted and remains

binding on the part as and all and sundry. Also trite is the law that an issue to be decided by an

appellate Court must be raised/based or formulated fromeither aground or combination of

grounds of appeal for it to be valid and relevant for consideration.” – Per Ige, J.C.A., in Ajala

v. I.G.P Suit No. CA/OW/100/2013; (2015) 16 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 1484) 172 at 190 – 191. (added)

Bindingness of decision of Supreme Court on Lower Courts.“In the case ofNigerian

Bottling Company Plc. v. Chief Uzoma Ubani (2014) 4 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 1398) 421at 450 A to

452 B per Chukwumah-Eneh, J.S.C., who said: ‘In that vein, this Court is bound to toe the line

as itis bound by the above cited cases in construing these provisions which are binding on this

Court as clearly stated in the case ofUniversity of Lagos & Ors. v. Olaniyan(1985) 1 N.S.C.C.

Vol. 1688, (1985) 1 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 1) 156where Nnamani, J.S.C. (of blessed memory) has said

1236

– “that when a lower Court (and I dare say this Court) is faced with the construction of a rulein

pari materiawith one that has been construed by the Supreme Court, the lower Court

(including this Court)has no option but to follow the principle laid down by the Supreme Court

in its construction” (words in bracket supplied). See also Karibi-Whyte, J.S.C., in Mobil Oil v.

1AL 36 Inc.(2000) F.W.L.R. (Pt. 10) 1632 at 1640, (2000) 6 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 659) 146. Being so

guided with regard to subsequent cases as inthe instant one, the principles laid down in those

cited cases are to govern and determine the decision in the instant matter and even then

subsequent cases albeit in recognition of the principle ofstare decisis. In other words, this

Court as the apex Court is bound to follow its decisions in this instance as in the immediate

above cited cases.” – PerIge, J.C.A., in Skye Bank (Nig.) Plc. v. OkparaSuit No.

CA/OW/226/2012; (2015) 17 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 1489) 613 at 645 – 646.

Bindingness of decisions of higher Courts on lower Courts and duty on lower Courts to

enforce such decisions. (1) “InUniversity of Lagosv. Olaniyan(supra)at 106, the Supreme

Court (PerNnamani J.S.C.) stated as follows: “where a higher Court in the hierarchy of Courts

has construed a rule of Court whichis inpari materiawith the rules of a lower Court, that

decision of the higher Court is binding on the lower Court in so far as the meaning of that rule

of Court is concerned.” See also the following cases: – Global Transport Oceanico S.A.v.Free

Enterprises Nig. Ltd.(supra). – Emerah & Sons Ltd v. A.-G., Plateau State (supra). –

Tukur v.Government of Gongola State(1989) 4N.W.L.R. (Pt. 117) Page 517 at 560.” – Per

Bada, J.C.A., in D.G., S.S.S. v. Ojukwu Suit No. CA/E/106/2005; (2006) 13 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 998)

575 at 586. (2) “It is an entrenched principle of law that lower Courts are bound by the decisions

of the higher Courts notwithstanding how witty and brilliant the decision of the lower Court

could have been.” – Per Orji-Abadua, J.C.A., in Emeluwa v. Onuigwe Suit No. CA/K/83/08;

(2011) 13 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 1265) 449 at 478. (3) “In the orderof hierarchy of Courts in the

Nigerian Judicial System and under the 1999 Constitution the Supreme Court is the Apex Court

followed by the Court of Appeal. In applying the principle or doctrine of judicial precedent

or stare decisis,all authorities of the Supreme Court take precedent over and above those of

Court of Appeal and they have more binding force over similar issues. The lower Court in the

judicial hierarchy is bound by the ratio decidendi of a higher and superior Court. The doctrine

does not allow for any judicial discretion on the part of a Judge of the lower Court.

Cardoso v. Daniel (1986) 2 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 20) pg. 1; Federal Govt, of

Nigeriav. Oshiomhole (2004) 3 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 860) pg. 305; Concord Press Nig.

Ltd. v.Olutola(1999) 9 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 620) pg. 578; Comptroller of Nigerian Prisons v.

Adekanye (1999) 10 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 623) pg. 400; Buhari v. Obasanjo (2005) 2 N.W.L.R. (Pt.

910) pg. 241; Ojukwuv. Obasanjo (2004) 12 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 886) pg. 169.” – Per Adekeye,

J.C.A., in State v. Okoye Suit No. CA/A/267/C/07; (2007) 16 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 1061) 607 at 663.

(4) “In the judicial hierarchy a lower Court is bound by theratio decidendiof a higher Court.

A Judge is not a law maker and so he must apply the law in its present form. The Judges of the

lower Court have no discretion to depart from the decision of the higher Court in the hierarchy

even when such decision is erroneous. Asituation w here a lower Court chose to ignore or

refuse to follow the decision of a higher Court will lead to chaos rather than stability. Atthe

trial Court, the learned counsel relied on two cases to determine the venue of the offence. The

learned counsel followed the case ofPatrick Njovensv. State (1973) 5 S.C. 17

andAdeniji v. State (2001) 13 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 730) pg. 375at 392 – 393 to argue that mere entry

of the accused to the jurisdiction of the Court where they were eventually arraigned conferred

jurisdiction on the Court. Whether or not the crime was committed within such jurisdiction.

The appellant relied on theprovision of section 4(2)(b) of the Penal Code of the High Court of

the Federal Capital Territory Abuja. In the case ofPatrick Njovensv. State, the Supreme Court