representative (capacity) actions • Helar

Q434. What are the essential ingredients or conditions that would need to be in place to qualify a party in a case to come in a representative capacity in land matters?

An action in a representative capacity can only be instituted by persons who have common interest and common grievance in the res or cause of action with those that they, Plaintiffs on record, claim to be part of and represent in the action. See Alafia V. Gbode Ventures (Nig.) Ltd. (2016) 7 NWLR (Pt. 1510) 116; Sapo V. Sunmonu (2010) 11 NWLR (Pt. 1205) 374. It must also be apparent on the face of the pleadings that those represented in the action stand to benefit from the success or victory in the litigation. See Bwari V. Oseni (1992) 4 NWLR (Pt. 237) 557; Idise V. Williams (1989) 5 NWLR (Pt. 370) 142. To satisfy this requirement, the Plaintiff(s) suing in a representative capacity would only need to state and disclose this commonality of interest in the res or cause of action in his/their pleadings. ELF PET. Nig. Ltd V. Umah & 4 ors [2018] HELAR ratio 10

Q435. Who in a family or community qualifies to sue in a representative capacity for himself and on behalf of the family or community over family or communal land?

The Head of the family or community, and indeed, any member or group of members of the family or community who can show that he/they shares/share and has/have interest in the land can bring an action to protect his/their and family or community interest. See Alafia V. Gbode Ventures (Nig.) Ltd. (2016) 7 NWLR (Pt. 1510) 116; Magrima v Magrima & ors (2021) HELAR Ratio 11

Q436. Is it necessary that Plaintiffs on record must first seek and obtain leave of Court before they can validly institute an action in representative capacity?

The Plaintiffs on record in a representative capacity may choose to file their action together with an application for leave of court to so institute their action, but the legal truth is that is not necessary. Not doing so takes nothing away from the their qualification to so institute the action once they do, by the pleadings, show that there exists that commonality of interest, grievance in the cause of action and in the benefit derivable from the action. See Anabaraonye V. Nwakaike (1997) 1 NWLR (Pt. 482) 374 @ 382; Sapo V. Sunmonu (2010) 11 NWLR (Pt. 1205) 374; National Union of Elect. Employees V. PHCN (2018) HELAR ratio 1

Q437. Can the Defendant in a representative action challenge the capacity of the Plaintiff on record to bring the action, insisting that his authority derived in any form such as Power of Attorney, Letter of Authority or Instruction given to him by those he represents must be first laid before the court as proof? A. No. The opposing side or party cannot challenge the capacity of one who has brought an action in a representative capacity, and who has pleaded the qualifying commonality of interest, grievance and apparent benefit to them all. Only a member or members of the group, family or commonity who he claims to represent can raise such challenge. The rest would be a matter to be handled in the trial and Address. ELF PET. Nig. Ltd V. Umah & 4 ors [2018] HELAR ratio 11

No. The opposing side or party cannot challenge the capacity of one who has brought an action in a representative capacity, and who has pleaded the qualifying commonality of interest, grievance and apparent benefit to them all. Only a member or members of the group, family or community who he claims to represent can raise such challenge. The rest would be a matter to be handled in the trial and Address. ELF PET. Nig. Ltd V. Umah & 4 ors [2018] HELAR ratio 11