ALL PURPOSE SHELTERS LTD V. ABAH DENNIS & ORS (2022)

Background

This case centers on a legal dispute involving All Purpose Shelters Ltd and a group of 707 claimants, led by Abah Dennis, concerning commercial spaces in the Wuye Ultra-Modern Market in Abuja. The respondents were dissatisfied with the imposition of an additional purchase price and sought legal recourse against the Federal Capital Territory and other entities.

Issues

The primary issue for determination was whether the respondents, who had initially been represented by a single counsel, could subsequently engage multiple counsels and file distinct briefs in an appeal. The appellant contended that this constituted an abuse of court process.

• Issue 1: Can the respondents, after previously acting as a unified group in court, now split and act separately with different counsels?
• Issue 2: Does the appellant have the right to dictate the choice of counsel representing the respondents?

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that every litigant has the fundamental right to choose their counsel as provided by Section 36 of the Constitution of Nigeria. The court emphasized that this choice is unfettered and cannot be curtailed by any other party or the court itself. The ruling reaffirmed the principle that a party is free to change counsel at any time, regardless of prior agreements, and that the court cannot impose representation.

Court Findings

The court found the appellant’s application to compel the respondents to retain a single counsel as misconceived and lacking merit. The ruling articulated that:

1. Parties engaged in legal proceedings have an essential and inalienable right to appoint their counsel without interference.
2. A party dissatisfied with a previous counsel may terminate that relationship and appoint a new counsel without seeking permission from the court.
3. There exists no justification for the court to intervene in the choice of legal representation, so long as the rights of all parties are respected.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court dismissed the appellant’s application, reiterating that the right to legal representation is a fundamental aspect of fair hearing. The court asserted that litigants cannot be restricted in their choice of counsel based on previous arrangements when those arrangements break down or become contentious.

Significance

This ruling is significant in reinforcing the principles of legal representation and fair hearing in Nigerian jurisprudence. It highlights the constitutional rights of litigants to engage and change their legal representatives without unnecessary restrictions, promoting the integrity and independence of the legal process.