MOSES APABIEKUN & ORS v. PATRICK BUKO & ORS
(2014)LCN/6933(CA)
RATIO
PRINCIPLES TO BE CONSIDERED FOR REJOINDER
In the case of Green v. Green (1987) 3 NWLR (Pt.60) 480 the Supreme Court laid down the principle for joinder as follows:- “the court should ask itself the following question
(a) Is the cause or matter liable to be defeated by non-joinder?
(b) Is it possible to adjudicate on the cause or matter unless the 3rd party is added as a defendant?
(c) Is the 3rd party a person who should have been joined in the first instance?
(d) Is the 3rd party a person +whose presence before the court as a defendant will be necessary in order to enable the court to effectually and completely adjudicate or settle all the questions involved in the cause or matter?”
No doubt the grant or refusal of an application for joinder is an exercise at the discretion of the trial Judge who is seize of the pleadings of the parties. The exercise however must be done judicially and judiciously. Discretion declares my lord Fabiyi JSC is a matter of being discreet. (See Ibegwura Ordu Azubuike v. Peoples Democratic Party & ors LER (2014) SC.476/2012) This court would ordinarily not interfere with an exercise of discretion by the trial court. I had earlier in this judgment reproduced a part of the Ruling of the trial court which is at pages 47-49 of the record. Nowhere is it shown that the learned trial Judge considered any of the ingredients for joinder listed above in the case of Green v. Green (supra) or as made out in any other case of the Apex court or this court. This approach of the learned trial Judge does not exhibit a judicial and judicious consideration of the application place before the court, notwithstanding the failure of the Appellants to respond to the fact of the existence of another case between the same parties in the Customary Court at Adodo-Otta. The learned trial Judge was not properly guided by this principle. Per MONICA BOLNA’AN DONGBAN-MENSEM, J.C.A.
