RATIO
WHETHER IT IS THE DUTY OF A COURT TO PRESERVE AND PREVENT WASTE OF AN UNREPRESENTED ESTATE OF A DECEASED PERSON.
“Vide Section 51 of Administration and Succession (Estate of Deceased Persons) Law of Anambra State, the High Court has a specific duty to preserve and prevent waste of the unrepresented estate of a deceased person. ” Per FABIYI, J.C.A.
WHETHER A TRIAL COURT MUST REFRAIN FROM GRANTING EX PARTE APPLICATIONS
“It is now clear beyond peradventure that a trial court must refrain from granting ex parte applications except there be urgent and special circumstances warranting same. See Kotoye v. Central Bank of Nigeria (1989) 1 NWLR (Pt. 98) 419 at 449. ” Per FABIYI, J.C.A.
THE NATURE OF LOCUS STANDI
“I quite appreciate that locus standi denotes the capacity to institute proceedings in a court of law and where a plaintiff lacks locus standi his case must be struck out as being incompetent. Refer to Owodunni v. Registered Trustees of C.C.C. (2000) 10 NWLR (Pt.675) 315. The test to be applied in determining locus standi of a plaintiff is whether her civil rights and obligations are affected. See Adesanya v. President of Nigeria (supra). When a party’s standing to sue is in issue in a case, the question is whether the person whose standing is in issue is a proper party to request an adjudication of a particular issue and not whether the issue itself is justiciable. See Oloriode v. Oyebi ( 1984) 5 SC 1, (1984) 1 SCNLR 390.” Per FABIYI, J.C.A.
WHAT THE COURT WILL LOOK AT TO DETERMINE WHETHER A PLAINTIFF HAS LOCUS STANDI
“This is an auspicious moment for me to point out that in order to determine whether a plaintiff has locus standi or not, the court looks at the statement of claim. See Adesokan v. Adegorolu (1997) 3 NWLR (Pt. 493) 261. This must be so since it is in the statement of claim that a plaintiff ventilates the facts and circumstances and in some instances, the capacity in which he initiates the claim. In Abraham Adesanya v. President of Nigeria (supra) cited by appellant’s counsel, issue of locus standi was raised after the statement of claim in that case had been filed; not before same. In this matter, it is only the writ of summons that has been filed. Understandably, a writ gives just a prelude that sets the action in motion. Consequently, it does not stand to reason to explore the locus standi of the plaintiff from the writ of summons. The issue of locus standi, based on the writ of summons, appears precipitate and hasty in the main. The point should be raised at the trial court in the first instance after the statement of claim must have been duly filed in that court.” Per FABIYI, J.C.A.
WHETHER BOTH PARTIES TO AN APPEAL, AS WELL AS THE COURT, MUST KNOW THE RECORD OF APPEAL
“I must note here that both parties to an appeal as well as the court must know, for sure, the record of appeal sustaining the filling of briefs of argument right from the on-set. This must be so in order to avoid confusion and to ensure a fair and balanced hearing.” Per FABIYI, J.C.A
