Court Dismisses Preliminary Objection, Orders Status Quo In Oloja Of Lagos Chieftaincy Suit

0

Justice Olalekan A. Oresanya of the Lagos State High Court has ordered all parties in the dispute over the Oloja of Lagos chieftaincy stool to maintain the status quo pending the determination of the substantive suit.

Justice Oresanya gave the verdict after dismissing a preliminary objection filed by one of the defendants, Prince Babajide Rafiu Kosoko, who had challenged the court’s jurisdiction to entertain the case. The objection was also supported by the 1st Defendant Oba Rilwan Akiolu.

The suit was instituted by Prince Surajudeen Abiodun Olojo-Kosoko, the Head of the Akinsanya Olojo Ruling House; Prince Theophilus Olojo-Kosoko, the ruling house’s General Secretary; and Prince Abiola Kosoko, who sued for themselves and on behalf of the Akinsanya Olojo-Kosoko Ruling House.

The defendants are the Oba of Lagos, Oba Rilwan Akiolu; the Lagos State Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice; the Commissioner for Local Government, Chieftaincy Affairs and Rural Development; the Executive Chairman of Lagos Island Local Government; Prince Babajide Rafiu Kosoko; Mr. Muritala Olanrewaju Kosoko; and Mr. Tunji Taiwo Kosoko.

The claimants through their counsel, Olusegun Fabunmi, SAN are challenging moves they alleged were aimed at replacing Prince Abiola Kosoko, whom they described as the duly nominated candidate of the Akinsanya Olojo Ruling House for the Oloja of Lagos stool.

In his preliminary objection, the fifth defendant through his counsel, Dayo Oshodi, SAN contended that the dispute borders on the nomination, selection and installation of a traditional ruler, matters governed by customary law and the Lagos State Obas and Chiefs Law, which, he argued, were outside the jurisdiction of the court.

He urged the court to dismiss the suit for want of jurisdiction. However, the claimants maintained that the dispute was not about the nomination process, which through Fabunmi, they contended had been concluded in 2020 with the emergence of the third claimant as the ruling house’s candidate.

They argued that the real issue arose after a land-related dispute, alleging that some of the defendants had disregarded the earlier nomination and were processing the candidacy of other princes.

In his ruling, Justice Oresanya held that the claimants’ statement of claim disclosed a reasonable cause of action capable of judicial determination.

The judge held that the dispute could not be resolved at the interlocutory stage and would require a full trial.

The court further ruled that where issues raised in a preliminary objection require evidence to be led, such objections cease to be pure jurisdictional issues and becomes matters for determination during the substantive hearing.

“I find no merit in the preliminary objection filed by the fifth defendant. The objection is overruled and the application is accordingly dismissed,” the judge held.

On the claimants’ application for an interlocutory injunction to restrain the defendants from recommending, selecting, nominating, appointing or installing any other person as Oloja of Lagos pending the determination of the suit, Justice Oresanya declined to grant the relief.

The court held that granting the injunction would effectively determine issues already raised in the substantive suit, thereby prejudicing the defendants before trial.

Instead, the court directed all parties to maintain the status quo ante bellum, the state of affairs existing before the events that culminated in the purported nomination of the fifth and sixth defendants.