Whether an Association is Bound by its Constitution

CASE TITLE: NWOSU & ANOR v. IBEKWE (2022) LPELR-58820(CA)

JUDGMENT DATE: 27TH OCTOBER, 2022

PRACTICE AREA: CHIEFTAINCY MATTERS

LEAD JUDGMENT: BOLOUKUROMO MOSES UGO, J.C.A.

SUMMARY OF JUDGMENT:

INTRODUCTION

This appeal borders on appointment of traditional head.

FACTS

This is an appeal against the decision of Badamasi, J., of the High Court of Kano State in Suit No K/200/2011. 

The dispute was about who, as between the 1st appellant and respondent, is the authentic traditional head of the Igbo Community Kano, whose title is Eze Igbo Kano. The said traditional stool is a creation of the Constitution 2000 AD, Igbo Community Association Kano. The said stool became vacant in November 2008 upon the demise of its last holder, Late Chief (Barrister) O.T. Nnadi, in November 2008. Appellants’ claim was that the first appellant is the authentic traditional head/Ruler of the Igbo Community Association Kano with his title as Onye Ndu Ndigbo Kano since his installation as Onye Ndu Ndigbo Kano on 30th October 2010. They claimed it is the new and current name of the Eze Ndigbo of Kano, same having been substituted for the Eze Ndigbo by the South East Council of Traditional Rulers who found it objectionable because it tended to clash with their own titles back home in the South-East. A resolution, they aver, was also passed to that effect by the Igbo Community Association, even as the Igbo Community Association Kano Constitution, which only recognizes the Eze Igbo Kano title, has not been amended to accommodate it.

Respondent on his part claimed he is the authentic Eze Ndigbo Kano, having been properly presented, screened by the Chieftaincy and Honours Committee of the Igbo Community Association Kano, approved by the General Assembly of the same Association and installed as Eze Ndigbo Kano since 14th March 2009, in line with the Igbo Community Association 2000 AD. He asserts, further, that the Onye Ndu Ndigbo Kano title claimed by appellants is even alien to the Igbo Community Association Constitution 2000 AD.

The dispute was finally taken to the Kano State High Court for adjudication by appellants when they sought several declaratory reliefs. The Respondent also filed a counter claim. ​Pleadings, including a defence to the counterclaim by appellants and a Reply by respondent and witness statements on oath, were exchanged by parties before the High Court, which after hearing evidence from witnesses to both sides and poring through several documents, including the Igbo Community Association (ICA) Kano Constitution 2000 AD that established the disputed stool of Eze Igbo Kano, determined that appellants failed to prove their claim, while respondent proved his counterclaim. He thus entered judgment for the respondent on his counterclaim in its totality and dismissed the claim of the appellants.

Being dissatisfied, appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal.

ISSUES FOR DETERMINATION

The Court determined the appeal based on the following issues for determination:

“1. Whether appellants proved their claim(s) and the learned trial Judge was wrong in dismissing it.

2. Whether the learned trial Judge was right in entering judgment for Respondent on his counterclaim having regard to the evidence adduced before him, and if he was, whether the general damages of ₦5m claimed by and awarded respondent by him was justifiable.”

DECISION/HELD

In the final analysis, the Court allowed the appeal in part. It failed on the account of the trial Court’s decision dismissing appellants’ claim but succeeded and was allowed on the issue of the grant by that Court of the counterclaim of respondent. Consequently, the decision of the High Court of Kano State, to the extent of grant of the counterclaim of respondent, including the damages of ₦5m it awarded, was set aside and in its stead, an order dismissing the same counterclaim was made.

RATIOS:

• EVIDENCE – BURDEN OF PROOF/ONUS OF PROOF – Whether a plaintiff must rely on the strength of his case and not the weakness of the case of a defendant
• INTERPRETATION OF DOCUMENT – CONSTRUCTION OF DOCUMENT(S)/INSTRUMENT(S) – How unambiguous words of an instrument/document are to be interpreted
• COMPANY LAW – CORPORATED AND INCORPORATED ASSOCIATION – Whether an Association is bound by its Constitution
• ACTION – COUNTER-CLAIM – Whether a counter claim is a separate and independent action whose success or failure does not depend on the main claim