Olubadan-in-council & Anor V. Memudu Lagunju (1949)
LawGlobal Hub Judgment Report – West African Court of Appeal
Motion for conditional leave to appeal to Privy Council—Chieftaincy Disputes(Preclusion of Courts) Ordinance, 1948—West African (Appeal to PrivyCouncil) Order in Council, 1930, Article 3.*
So long as an appeal lies to the West African Court of Appeal under section 5 of the Chieftaincy Disputes (Preclusion of Courts) Ordinance, 1948, there is a further right of appeal to the Privy Council as provided by Article 3 of the West African (Appeal to Privy Council) Order in Council, 1930.*
c,c1.1111Ut uverricle the provisions of an Imperial Order in
Council.
Awolowo for Appellants (defendants below).
Thomas and Agbaje for Respondent (plaintiff below).
The following joint judgment was delivered:
This motion for conditional leave to appeal to the Privy Council from a judgment of this Court in a suit relating to a chieftaincy dispute was opposed on the ground that since the coming into operation of the Chieftaincy Disputes (Preclusion of Courts) Ordinance, 1948 (No. 30 of 1948), no Court has jurisdiction, either original or appellate, to entertain any civil cause or matter relating to the determination of any such question. Further that section 5 merely saves appeals from the decisions of the Supreme Court or a Magistrate’s Court in pending causes. It was argued, therefore, that as the section did not make any mention of an appeal from a judgment of the West African Court of Appeal, appeals in pending actions can be taken no further than this Court.
But the right of appeal to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council from a decision of this Court, conferred by Article 3 of the West African (Appeal to Privy Council) Order in Council, 1930*, provides that an appeal lies to the Privy Council as of right from any final judgment of the West African Court of Appeal and local legislation cannot override the provisions of an Order of His Majesty in Council. So long, therefore, as an appeal lies to this Court under section 5 of Ordinance 30 of 1948, there is a further right of appeal to the Privy Council.
As then there has been a final judgment of this Court in the present case, and as the appeal involves a claim to an annual salary of about £500 it comes, in our opinion, within the terms of Article 3. Conditional leave to appeal is therefore granted on the conditions set out in the formal order now to be made.
Conditional leave to appeal granted.
