The defendants are Aleburu, High Chief Charles Edekin Bonnie and Chief Palmer Uhakheme, (for themselves and on behalf of other kingmakers of Sobe). Justice A.N. Erhabor in his judgment, struck out the suit on the ground that the claimant, Engr. (Chief) John Gold Imonikhe, failed to exhaust all the remedies provided for or followed the procedure prescribed by applicable laws. The court held that the suit was not ripe for determination. Justice Erhabor also declined to restrain the first defendant from parading or holding himself out to the public as Odibiado and traditional ruler of Sobe. The claimant in a motion on notice dated December 28, 2012 filed through his counsel, Mr M.O. Okhuarobo, had sought four reliefs from the court including an order restraining the first defendant from presenting himself for installation as Odibiado of Sobe. He had also sought an order restraining the second and third defendants from installing the first defendant or any other person other than the claimant as Odibiado of Sobe pending the determination of the substantive suit among other prayers. In a 35-paragraph counter affidavit, the first and third defendant averred that the claimant was among the signatories that forwarded the name of the king-elect to the Edo State government in a letter dated March 27, 2012. They further averred that the claimant is not a full fledged Ibiado Chief since he has not completed the rites that could have qualified him as an Ibiado chief and alleged that he was not known to the town. The defendants also averred that though the late father of the claimant reigned in Sobe and wore beads on him in order for him to proceed to complete all the rites in the presence of all Ibiado chiefs, he has not done this till date. They contended that the claimant exhibited ignorance of Sobe custom. In his judgment, Justice Erhabor, citing relevant authorities, held that where a statute prescribed a legal line of action for determination of an issue, the aggrieved party must exhaust all the remedies in that law before going to court. “It is my view that in a chieftaincy dispute, an aggrieved person who brings a suit must show that he brought his suit after he had exhausted the remedies provided or followed the procedure prescribed by applicable laws. “In other words, the statement of claim must articulate the essential fact that local remedies have been exhausted before resorting to court. I hold this suit premature and precipitate. “I agree that this action is not ripe for determination as the other remedies provided in the statute have not been explored. Consequently this suit is hereby struck out”, the trial judge added. ]]>

"Exciting news! TheNigeriaLawyer is now on WhatsApp Channels 🚀 Subscribe today by clicking the link and stay updated with the latest legal insights!" Click here! ....................................................................................................................... Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material and other digital content on this website, in whole or in part, without express and written permission from TheNigeriaLawyer, is strictly prohibited _________________________________________________________________ [Register Now] ILA Nigeria Branch Marks 10 Years With Infrastructure Financing As Theme For 7th Annual Conference The International Law Association - Nigeria Branch 7th annual conference on public-private partnerships for sustainable infrastructure financing, April 4-5 in Abuja. Details: https://ilanigeria.org.ng/conference _________________________________________________________________

NIALS' Compendia Series: Your One-Stop Solution For Navigating Nigerian Laws (2004-2023)

Email: info@nials.edu.ng, tugomak@yahoo.co.uk, Contact: For Inquiry and information, kindly contact, NIALS Director of Marketing: +2348074128732, +2348100363602.