OLAKUNRIN & ORS. V. OGUNOYE & ORS

• Pages: 687-721

ΟΛΑΚΥΝΡΙΝ & ΟΡΣ. ς. ΟΓΥΝΟΨΕ & ΟΡΣ.

687

σπονδεντ ιν 1957 ανδ 1959. Ηε χονχεδεδ τηισ ασ παρχελ Α ιν Εξηιβιτ Α. Ωιτη ρε−

σπεχτ το παρχελ Β ιν Εξηιβιτ Α, ηε δενιεδ τηατ ιτ ωασ ωηερε ιτ ωασ χλαιµεδ το βε ιν

Εξηιβιτ Α. Ηε σαιδ τηε λανδ ηε σολδ ωασ ελσεωηερε. Τηε λεαρνεδ τριαλ ϕυδγε ρε−

σολϖεδ τηισ ισσυε ιν φαϖουρ οφ πλαιντιφφ/ρεσπονδεντ ανδ τηε Χουρτ οφ Αππεαλ αχχεπτεδ

5

τηισ φινδινγ. Τηε χονχυρρεντ φινδινγσ οφ φαχτ µαδε ιν τηε τωο χουρτσ βελοω χαν ονλψ

βε ιντερφερρεδ ωιτη ιν τηισ χουρτ ωηερε τηε χουρτσ βελοω ηαϖε βεεν σηοων το βε ιν

µανιφεστ ερρορ ιν τηειρ φινδινγ, ορ τηε φινδινγσ οφ φαχτ ασ τηεψ αρε ωουλδ λεαδ το α

µισχαρριαγε οφ ϕυστιχε. Σεε

Lokoyi & anor. v. Olojo

(1983) 8 Σ.Χ. 61, 68 − 72. Απ−

πελλαντσ ηαϖε βεεν υναβλε το σηοω ανψ συχη ερρορσ ιν τηε φινδινγσ οφ φαχτ οφ τηε

10

χουρτ βελοω το ϕυστιφψ τηε ιντερφερενχε οφ τηισ χουρτ.

Ι τηερεφορε δισµισσ τηισ αππεαλ ωιτη χοστσ φιξεδ ατ Ν300. Τηε ϕυδγµεντ οφ τηε

Χουρτ οφ Αππεαλ ισ ηερεβψ αφφιρµεδ.

Αππεαλ δισµισσεδ

15

ΟΛΑΚΥΝΡΙΝ & ΟΡΣ. ς. ΟΓΥΝΟΨΕ & ΟΡΣ.

20

ΤΗΕ ΣΤΑΤΕ ΕΞ−ΠΑΡΤΕ

ϑΟΣΕΠΗ ΑϑΙ∆ΑΣΙΛΕ

ΟΛΑΚΥΝΡΙΝ & 6 ΟΡΣ.

ς

25

ΟΒΑ ΑΛΑΙΨΕΛΥΩΑ ΟΓΥΝΟΨΕ

ΤΗΕ ΟΛΟΩΟ ΟΦ ΟΩΟ & 6 ΟΡΣ.

ΣΥΠΡΕΜΕ ΧΟΥΡΤ ΟΦ ΝΙΓΕΡΙΑ

ΒΕΛΛΟ,

ϑ.Σ.Χ.

30

ΟΒΑΣΕΚΙ,

ϑ.Σ.Χ.

ΝΝΑΜΑΝΙ,

ϑ.Σ.Χ.

ΚΑΡΙΒΙ−ΩΗΨΤΕ,

ϑ.Σ.Χ.

ΚΑΩΥ,

ϑ.Σ.Χ.

17τη Μαψ, 1985

35

ΑΠΠΕΛΛΑΝΤΣ

ΡΕΣΠΟΝΕΝΤΣ

ΣΥΙΤ ΝΟ. ΣΧ 9

8

/

1

984

Administrative Law - Certiorari, Prohibition - Application to quash the deposition

of applicants as minor Chiefs and to restrain persons appointed in their place

from parading themselves as chiefs - Applicants aggrieved at 1st defendant's

installation as Paramount Chief and removal of his predecessor, addressing

40

petition to Governor in newspaper for his removal.

Constitutional Law - Fair hearing - Right to impartial tribunal - Whether principles

of natural justice violated by 1st defendant in deposing applicants - Legal

notice delegating Governor-in- Council's powers of deposition to Paramount

45

Chief as designated authority not unconstitutional - Natural justice - Audi

Alteram Partem - Nemo Judex in causa sua protest - Appellants recalcitrant

in their reply and making no request for particulars of charge against them

- Whether applicants adequate notice of complaints against them opportunity

to defend themselves - Whether 1st defendant as accuser and judge disqualified

50

for bias.

ΙΣΣΥΕΣ:

1. Ωηετηερ σεχτιον 22 οφ τηε Χηιεφ∋σ Λαω οφ Ονδο Στατε ισ ιν αχχορδ ωιτη τηε

προϖισιονσ οφ τηε Χονστιτυτιον ρεθυιρινγ φαιρ ηεαρινγ.

688

NIGERIAN SUPREME COURT CASES

[1985] 1 N.S.C.C.

2.

Whether Section 22 Western State Law of Nigeria 63 of 1967 under which the

Olowo of Owo in Ondo State deposed his minor Chiefs violated the principle

of natural justice requiring that a man cannot be a judge in his own cause.

3.

Whether the rule of necessity can supercede the rule of natural justice in certain

5

cases.

FACTS:

The appellants were Traditional Chiefs, having been appointed by the Ex-Olowo

of Owo. The 1st Respondent is the Olowo of Owo. On his appointment in 1968

he still accepted the appellants as traditional office holders. Although relation-

ships appeared cordial for some time matters soon deteriorated between the 1st

10

respondent and the appellants. The appellants jointly wrote a letter to the Governor

of Ondo State, which was published in the newspapers, praying the removal of

the 1st respondent. The 1st respondent then sent the appellants a letter of warn-

ing, charging them with disloyalty and of dereliction of their traditional duties. The

appellants replied through their solicitor, stating that the question of loyalty should

15

not arise, as they did not consider him duly elected as the Olowo of Owo. The

Olowo thus deposed them as traditional chiefs, and appointed new ones.

The appellants started proceedings in the High Court for orders of

certiorari

and prohibition to issue against the 1st respondent, and the new chiefs, claiming

that the Olowo acted without jurisdiction and in excess of his powers and that he

20

violated the rules of natural justice in not granting the appellants a fair hearing. The

orders were refused. On appeal to the Court of Appeal the appeal was dismissed.

Appellants thereupon appealed to the Supreme Court.

HELD:

1. The preconditions attaching to the exercise of power under Section 22 of the

25

Chiefs Laws (i.e. power to suspend or a depose chief) accord with fairness

and more specifically with one of the principles of natural justice: that no man

ought to be condemned without a hearing. The circumstances of this case and

the contents of the warning letter sent by the respondent to the appellants gave

them ample opportunity to defend themselves of the charge that they were

30

disloyal and in dereliction of their traditional duties. Rather than take this

opportunity they replied through their solicitor in terms that suggested he had

no right to expect the performance of those duties or loyalty to his person. There

is therefore no basis for upholding their complaint about not being given a

35

chance to defend themselves.

2. The general rule is that as regards bias or likelihood of bias, the common law

has disqualified an adjudicator from adjudicating whenever circumstances

point to a real likelihood that he will have a bias by which is meant "an

operative prejudice whether conscious or unconscious" R. v. Queen's Country

J.J.

(1908) 2 I.R. 285, 294. But it is accepted that the common law

40

disqualification for interest and bias may be waived. Where as here the

Governor appeared unwilling to act, it seems that this is a case of

disqualification removed by subsidiary legislation at least by necessary

intendment. Besides it is settled that a person (the respondent) who is

prima

facie

disqualified for interest or bias may adjudicate as here on grounds of

45

necessity if no duly qualified tribunal can act.

3. By virtue of the provisions of section 33(2)(a) of the 1979 Constitution the power

of the chief under the Law was not inconsistent with the 1979 Constitution since

the appellants whose rights and obligations were affected by the exercise of

the Olowo's statutory powers had ample opportunity to make representations

50

to the administering authority before such authority made the decision affecting

them. The respondent acted within his powers and there was no breach of the

fair hearing provisions.

ΟΛΑΚΥΝΡΙΝ & ΟΡΣ. ς. ΟΓΥΝΟΨΕ & ΟΡΣ.

669

4.

Ιν τηισ χασε βεχαυσε οφ τηε σπεχιαλ χιρχυµστανχεσ ι.ε. τηε Γοϖερνορ ιν Χουνχιλ

βεινγ υνωιλλινγ το ιντερϖενε ασ προϖιδεδ φορ βψ λαω βεχαυσε ηε φελτ τηατ τηε

µαττερ ωασ πυρελψ βετωεεν τηε Ολοωο ανδ ηισ Χηιεφσ οϖερ ωηοµ τηε Ολοωο

εξερχισεσ αυτηοριτψ υνδερ τηε Λαωσ; τηε Ολοωο τηυσ ηαδ το βε α ϕυδγε ιν ηισ οων

5

χαυσε σο ασ το αβατε τηε δερελιχτιον οφ δυτψ ανδ ινδισχιπλινε οφ ηισ χηιεφσ. Τηε

ρυλε οφ νεχεσσιτψ περµιτσ αν αδϕυδιχατορ το βε α ϕυδγε ιν ηισ χαυσε ιφ ηισ

παρτιχιπατιον ισ αβσολυτελψ νεχεσσαρψ το αρριϖε ατ α δεχισιον.

5.

ΚΑΡΙΒΙ−ΩΗΨΤΕ, ϑ.Σ.Χ. (∆ισσεντινγ): Τηε εξερχισε οφ ποωερ βψ τηε Ολοωο ωασ

ιµπροπερ ασ ιτ ωασ νοτ εξερχισεδ υνδερ δελεγατιον ασ προϖιδεδ φορ βψ λαω. Τηε

10

αππελλαντσ ωερε δεπριϖεδ οφ α φαιρ ηεαρινγ.

ΧΑΣΕΣ ΡΕΦΕΡΡΕ∆ ΤΟ ΙΝ ϑΥ∆ΓΜΕΝΤ:

1.

Στατε Χιϖιλ Σερϖιχε Χοµµισσιον ϖ. Βυζυγβε,

(1984) 7 ΣΧ 19

2.

Μεµυδυ Λαγυνϕυ ϖ. Ολυβαδαν ιν Χουνχιλ,

12 Ω.Α.Χ.Α 400

15

3.

Κανδα ϖ. Γοϖερνµεντ οφ Μαλαψα,

(1962) Α.Χ. 322

4.

Ρ. ϖ. Θυεεν∋σ Χουντρψ ϑ.ϑ,

(1908) 2 ΙΡ 285. 294

5.

Οβαδαρα & Ορσ ϖ. Χ.Ο.Π,

(1965) Ν.Μ.Λ.Ρ. 39

6.

Φρανκλιν ϖ. Μινιστερ οφ Τοων & Χουντρψ Πλαννινγ,

(1948) Α.Χ. 87

7.

Ριχε ϖ. Χοµµισσιονερ οφ Σταµπ ∆υτιεσ,

(1954) Α.0 216, 234

20

8.

Εζε Ορισακερε ϖ. Ιµο Στατε Γοϖερνορ & Ορσ,

(1982) 3 ΝΧΛΡ 743

9.

Θυεεν ϖ. Αδµινιστρατορ οφ Ωεστερν Νιγερια, Εξ παρτε Αδεβο,

(1962)

Ω.Ν.Λ.Ρ.

83

10.

Θυεεν ϖ. Γοϖερνορ−ιν−χουνχιλ Ωεστερν Νιγερια, Εξ παρτε Κασαλι Αδεναιψα,

(1962) 1 Αλλ Ν.Λ.Ρ. 300

25

11.Ριδγε ϖ. Βαλδωιν,

(1964) Α.Χ. 40, 75−76

12.Ηαρτ ϖ.

Μιλιταρψ Γοϖερνορ Ριϖερσ Στατε,

(1976) 11 ΣΧ 211, 238

13.Φαλοµο ϖ. Λαγοσ Στατε Πυβλιχ Σερϖιχε Χοµµισσιον,

(1977) 5 Σ.Χ. 51, 61

14.Βονακερ

ϖ. Εϖανσ,

(1850) 16 Θ.Β. 162, 171

15.Γοκπα

ϖ. Ι.Γ.Π,

(1961) 1 Αλλ Ν.Λ.Ρ. 423

30

16.Αριορι ϖ. Ελεµο & Ορσ,

(1983)

1

Σ.Χ. 13

17.Χεψλον Υνιϖερσιτψ ϖ. Φερνανδο,

(1960) 1 Ω.Λ.Ρ. 223

18.Λεεσον ϖ. Γενεραλ Μεδιχαλ Χουνχιλ,

(1890) 43 Χη.∆. 366

19.

Γενεραλ Μεδιχαλ Χουνχιλ ϖ. Σπαχκµαν,

(1943) ΑΧ 627

20.Μοηαµµεδ ϖ. Κανο Ν.Α.,

(1968) 1 Αλλ ΝΛΡ 424

35

21.

Τηε Σεισταν,

(1960) 1 ΩΛΡ 186 Π∆

22.Ανναµυατηοδο

ϖ.

Οιλφιελδ Ωορκερσ Τραδε Υνιον,

(1963) 3 ΩΛΡ 650

23.

Τολπυττ ϖ. Μαλε,

(1911) 1 Κ.Β. 87

24.∆ιµεσ ϖ. Γρανδ ϑυνχτιον Χαναλ,

(1852) 3 Η.Λ. Χασ 759

25.∆ρ.

Αλακιϕα ϖ. Μεδιχαλ ∆ισχιπλινερ)/ Χοµµιττεε,

(1959) 4 ΦΣΧ 38.

40

26.Αλλινσον ϖ. Γενεραλ Χουνχιλ οφ Μεδιχαλ Εδυχατιον ανδ Ρεγιστρατιον,

(1894) 1

Θ.Β 750, 758

27.Ρεγ. ϖ. Αλλαν,

4 Β&Σ 915, 926

28.∆ιχκσον ϖ, Εδωαρδσ,

(1910) 10 ΧΛΡ 259

29.

Ωονγ Ρευν Χηευκ ϖ. Τηε Μεδιχαλ Χουνχιλ οφ Ηονγ Κονγ & Τηε Α

Γ.,

45

(1964) Κ.Λ.Ρ. 47

30.0ψελαδε ϖ. Αραοψε,

(1967) 1 Αλλ Ν.Λ.Ρ. 321, 328

31.Μαχλεαν ϖ. Ωορκερσ∋ Υνιον,

(1929) 1 Χη. 602, 625

32.Οκυπε ϖ.

Φεδεραλ Βοαρδ οφ Ινλανδ Ρεϖενυε,

(1974) 1 Ν.Μ.Λ.Ρ. 422

33.Ρ. ϖ.

Βαρνσλεψ ϑυστιχεσ,

(1960) 2 Θ.Β. 167

50

34.Σηιττα−Βεψ ϖ. Φ.Π.Σ.Χ.,

(1981) 1 Σ.Χ. 40

35.Φυµελλ ϖ. Ωηεγαρελ Σχηοολσ Βοαρδ

(1974) 2 Ω.Λ.Ρ. 92.

36.Ρ. ϖ.

Λεε

(1882) 9 Θ.Β.∆. 394.

Χηιεφ Αφε Βαβαλολα,

φορ Αππελλαντσ.