CASE TITLE: IGP & ORS v. OKO & ANOR (2025) LPELR-81412 (CA)
JUDGMENT DATE: 11TH JUNE, 2025
PRACTICE AREA: CONSTITUTIONAL LAW
LEAD JUDGMENT: ABBA BELLO MOHAMMED, J.C.A.
SUMMARY OF JUDGMENT:
INTRODUCTION:
This appeal borders on Fundamental Rights Enforcement.
FACTS:
This is an appeal against the judgment of the Federal High Court, Abuja Division, delivered by Hon. Justice I. E. Ekwo on the 8th of July, 2022, in Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/1530/2021 – DANIEL OKO v INSPECTOR-GENERAL OF POLICE & 4 ORS.
The 1st Respondent, who was the Applicant before the trial Court, filed an Originating Motion on Notice, wherein he sought to enforce his fundamental rights against the Appellants and 2nd Respondent, who were the Respondents. In response to the action, the 2nd Respondent filed a counter affidavit accompanied with a written address.
The Appellants filed a preliminary objection to the competence of the action and the jurisdiction of the trial Court to entertain the action. The preliminary objection was supported by an affidavit and written address.
At the hearing of the action before the trial Court, the 1st Respondent moved his application for the enforcement of his fundamental rights.
The trial Court also adopted the Appellants’ processes in the absence of the Appellants’ Counsel, Wisdom Madaki Esq., who had entered his name in the cause list as appearing for the Appellants but was absent when the matter was called for hearing. In his judgment, the learnt trial judge had dismissed the preliminary objection of the Appellants and entered judgment for the respondent, granting ₦2,000,000.00 (two million naira) in general damages against the Appellants jointly and severally in favour of the Respondent.
Dissatisfied with the judgment, the Appellants approached the Court of Appeal.
ISSUES FOR DETERMINATION:
The Court considered the following issues:
1. Whether the lower Court was right to have dismissed the Appellants’ Notice of Preliminary Objection.
2. Whether the trial Court was right when it held that the 1st Respondent proved his case and entered judgment for the 1st Respondent.
DECISION/HELD:
In conclusion, the Court dismissed the Appeal.
RATIOS:
- CONSTITUTIONAL LAW- ENFORCEMENT OF FUNDAMENTAL HUMAN RIGHT(S): Proper mode of commencing an action for the enforcement of a fundamental right.
- CONSTITUTIONAL LAW- ENFORCEMENT OF FUNDAMENTAL HUMAN RIGHT(S): Duty of an applicant in an application for the enforcement of fundamental rights
- EVIDENCE- AFFIDAVIT EVIDENCE: Purpose of a counter affidavit
- EVIDENCE- UNCHALLENGED/UNCONTROVERTED EVIDENCE: Effect of unchallenged/uncontroverted evidence
- POLICE- DUTY OF POLICE: Whether the duty of the police includes the settlement of civil dispute or debt collection
- PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE- APPLICATION(S)/MOTION(S): Whether heading an originating motion as originating motion on notice will render them incompetent
To read the full judgment or similar judgments, subscribe to Prime or Primsol
