site logo

FAJEMIROKUN V. COMMERCIAL BANK (NIG.) LTD (2009)

case summary

Supreme Court of Nigeria

Before Their Lordships:

  • Aloysius IYORGYER KATSINA-ALU JSC (Presided)
  • Aloma MARIAM MUKHTAR JSC
  • Francis FEDODE TABAI JSC
  • Ibrahim TANKO MUHAMMAD JSC
  • James OGENYI OGEBE JSC (Read the Lead Judgment)

Parties:

Appellant:

  • Chief (Dr.) Oladele Fajemirokun

Respondent:

  • Commercial Bank (Nig.) Ltd
Suit number: SC.336/2002

Background

The case of Chief (Dr.) Oladele Fajemirokun v. Commercial Bank (Nig.) Ltd revolves around an application for the enforcement of fundamental human rights, stemming from alleged unlawful arrest and detention of the appellant by the police, initiated at the behest of the respondents. The appellant claimed that his rights had been violated when he was arrested in 1995, prompting a judicial pursuit for damages and a declaration of the illegality of the actions taken against him.

Issues

The primary issues presented before the Supreme Court were:

  1. Whether the details outlined in the appellant's processes sufficiently established a violation of his fundamental human rights.
  2. Whether the appellant was obliged to join the police as a necessary party in the case, having identified the respondents as responsible for the infringement of his rights.

Ratio Decidendi

The court's reasoning was anchored on key legal principles concerning the enforcement of fundamental rights:

  1. Burden of Proof: The appellant bore the onus of establishing that his rights were infringed, adhering to the principle that he who asserts must provide proof. The Supreme Court reaffirmed that failure to demonstrate that the alleged infringement occurred warranted dismissal of the appeal.
  2. Non-Joinder of Necessary Party: The court found that the police, being integral in the alleged arrest and detention process, should have been joined as co-defendants for a full adjudication of the matter. The absence of the police deprived the trial court of the ability to conclusively address all relevant issues.
  3. Concurrent Findings: The Supreme Court asserted its reluctance to interfere with the concurrent findings of the lower courts unless compelling reasons justified it. Here, the appellant failed to provide sufficient evidence to alter those findings.

Court Findings

The Supreme Court upheld the decisions made by the High Court and the Court of Appeal, highlighting several key findings:

  1. The appellant had not substantiated his claims with concrete evidence; thus, his assertion of unlawful arrest was dismissed.
  2. Reported allegations of theft were not proven as the police records that purportedly supported such claims were not produced by the appellant.
  3. The duty of the respondents was confined to lodging a complaint regarding dud cheques, and any police action stemming from that complaint was within lawful rights.

Conclusion

Consequently, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, asserting that it lacked merit because the appellant failed to meet the burden of proof regarding the infringement of his fundamental rights and the non-joinder of the police was fatal to his claims.

Significance

This case serves as an important precedent concerning the enforcement of fundamental human rights in Nigeria, particularly the necessity of adequate evidence in support of claims and the implications of failing to join necessary parties in legal actions against alleged human rights violations. It reinforces the principle that citizens reporting crimes to the police bear no malice, and that procedural compliance is paramount in safeguarding justice.