OKUNOLA V. OGUNDIRAN & ANOR.
| Pages | 59-63 |
OKUNOLA V. OGUNDIRAN & ANOR.
59
Unsworth, F.J.
I concur.
Bairamian, F.J. I
concur.
5
OKUNOLA V. OGUNDIRAN & ANOR.
10 M.H. OKUNOLA
V
D. OGUNDIRAN
I. AMADI EMINA
15 D. OGUNDIRAN
V
M.H.
OKUNOLA
I. AMADI EMINA
20
FEDERAL SUPREME COURT
ADEMOLA,
C.J.F.
UNSWORTH,
F.J.
BAIRAMIAN,
F.J.
5th February, 1962
25
APPELLANT
RESPONDENTS
CROSS APPELLANT
CROSS RESPONDENTS
SUIT NO. FSC 354/1961
Practice and Procedure - Election Petition and Cross Petition - Election to
Western Region house of assembly - Arithmetical error in count - Unsuccessful
candidate declared elected - Subsequent declaration ofelection of rival candidate
invalid - Election may be questioned by petition to High Court only.
30
ISSUES:
1.
Whether a sitting parliamentary member may present a petition about his seat.
2.
Whether a return which has been declared invalid can be used to return a party
to an election.
35
FACTS:
This was an election petition. Candidates were: Okunola, Ogunciiran and one
Atanda who is not involved in the case. At the end of polling, Okunola was de-
clared elected but it was later discovered that there had been an arithmetical error
and that Ogundiran had in fact won Ogundiran was therefore declared winner in
40
correction of the error.
Okunola appealed on the ground that Ogundiran was not duly elected. Ogun-
diran cross appealed. The High Court declared Ogundiran duly elected although
it noted that the subsequent return made by the Returning officer was invalid. Oku-
nola further appealed on this ground and also on the issue of whether a sitting par-
45
liamentary member can bring a petition or be a petitioner about his seat.
HELD:
1.
Where an arithmetical error is discovered after a return has been made in the
counting of votes, any subsequent return is invalid.
2.
Notwithstanding his ruling as to the validity or invalidity of the return; the judge
50
in deciding an election petition must declare which candidate was duly elected.
To continue reading
Request your trial