Home » WACA Cases » Nnamene Anjoku & Anor V. Ivube Nwa Nnamani (1953) LJR-WACA

Nnamene Anjoku & Anor V. Ivube Nwa Nnamani (1953) LJR-WACA

Nnamene Anjoku & Anor V. Ivube Nwa Nnamani (1953)

LawGlobal Hub Judgment Report – West Africa Court of Appeal

Inter-Tribal Boundaries Settlement Ordinance—Inquiry into dispute between tribes—Settlement ofboundaries between their lands—Estoppel—Resjudicata.

Facts

The above Ordinance authorises a District Officer, with the approval of his Resident, to inquire and decide a dispute between “ tribes ” (which includes a sub-tribe, clan, village, etc.) as to the boundaries between their lands (sections 3 and 2) and gives him a magistrate’s powers of enforcing the attendance of witnesses and the production of documents (section 9).

His decision is subject to review by his Resident and the Lieutenant-Governor (sections 6 and 7). The decision on the inquiry or review shall be registered by the Resident (section 10), and it is an offence to act against it punishable with fine or imprisonment (section 11).

The appellants as plaintiffs in the Supreme Court sued the respondents as defendants for a declaration of title to certain lands. There had been an inquiry under the above Ordinance into their dispute and a decision (confirmed on review at appellants’ instance) on the boundary between their respective lands, which was shown as a line on a plan with the appellants’ (plaintiffs’) village to the West of that line and the respondents’ (defendants’) village to the East of it.

The lands claimed by the appellants as plaintiffs in their suit lay to the East of the boundary settled under the Ordinance, and the suit was in substance the old dispute raised in another form. The Supreme Court held that the boundary so settled was res judica precluding a suit between the parties on the boundary or on title to land on either side, and dismissed the suit. The plaintiffs appealed.

See also  Mori Bayor V. Commissioner Of Income-tax (1955) LJR-WACA

In the appeal it was contended for the plaintiffs (appellants) that the acts of the District Officer were administrative and his decision (as also of his superiors who affirmed it), though arrived at in accordance with judicial principles, was not a judicial decision and could not support a plea of resjudicata.

Held

A District Officer acting under the Inter-Tribal Boundaries Settlement Ordinance is a judicial tribunal and his decision (subject to review under the Ordinance) is conclusive upon the issue so determined and operates as res judicata precluding a suit seeking to question it.


Appeal dismissed.

More Posts

Section 47 EFCC Act 2004: Short Title

Section 47 EFCC Act 2004 Section 47 of the EFCC Act 2004 is about Short Title. This Act may be cited as the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (Establishment,

Section 46 EFCC Act 2004: Interpretation

Section 46 EFCC Act 2004 Section 46 of the EFCC Act 2004 is about Interpretation. In this Act – Interpretation “Commission” means the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission established

Section 45 EFCC Act 2004: Savings

Section 45 EFCC Act 2004 Section 45 of the EFCC Act 2004 is about Savings. The repeal of the Act specified in section 43 of this Act shall not

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

LawGlobal Hub is your innovative global resource of law and more. We ensure easy accessibility to the laws of countries around the world, among others