ENUGU, Nigeria (VOICE OF NAIJA)- The Court of Appeal, Asaba Judicial Division, on Friday, 12th March 2021, before their Lordships Mohammed A. Danjuma, JCA, Joseph Eyo Ekanem, JCA, and Abimbola O. Obaseki-Adejumo, JCA, has deliberated the case of the Governor of Delta State of Nigeria & 2 Ors versus Olukunle Ogheneovo Edun, Esq.
The Respondent, a Legal Practitioner from Warri, was driving his vehicle along Afisere Road, Ughelli, Delta State, when Officers of the 3rd Appellant stopped him at a roadblock and requested his Certificate of Road Worthiness.
The Respondent, asserting that his vehicle was privately owned and not used for commercial purposes, argued he was exempt from needing such a certificate.
The ensuing traffic congestion prompted the release of the Respondent, who later discovered he was issued a Certificate of Road Worthiness despite his vehicle’s private status.
He subsequently sought interpretation of the requirement through an Originating Summons in the High Court of Delta State.
READ ALSO: Operation Zero Tolerance: FRSC Arrests 4,907 Traffic Offenders In FCT
This is according to the Modern Weekly Law Report (MWLR), a publication of Doyen Law Publishers Limited.
Issues for Determination include;
1.Whether the suit of the Respondent filed against the Appellants on 21 November 2014 is not statute-barred, in view of the provisions of Section 2(a) of the Public Officers Protection Law, Cap. P.23, Vol. IV, Laws of Delta State of Nigeria, 2006.
2.Whether the 3rd Appellant “Senior Vehicle Inspection Officer (Ughelli North Local Government Area of Delta State), is a juristic person that can be sued.
3.Whether by virtue of the provisions of all relevant laws relating to Road Traffic, the Certificate of Road Worthiness has no application to private motor vehicles.
The counsel however argued that: on issue 1 Appellants’ counsel submitted that the suit of the Appellant is statute-barred.
He referred to Section 2(a) of the Public Officers Protection Laws of the Delta State and submitted that the Appellants are Public officers within the intendment of the provision.
He contended that the cause of action arose on 5 August 2014, while the suit was filed on 21 November 2014, which is over the 3 month period prescribed by the Public Officers Protection Law.
He placed reliance on Ibrahim v. Judicial Service Commission, Kaduna State (1998) 64 LRCN 5044, among other cases.
Their Lordships held that the reason of the Public Officers Protection Law, is to protect public officers from civil liability for any wrongdoing that occasions damages to any citizen if the action is not instituted within 3 months after the act, default or neglect complained of.
The court also held that law is designed to protect only the officer who acts in good faith and does not apply to acts done in abuse of office and without semblance of legal justification.
Their lordships held that there is however one well-established exception to the applicability of the Public Officers Protection Law, namely that it does not apply to acts of a public officer which are outside the scope of the authority or which is in abuse of his office or without semblance of legal justification.
After some arguments, Their Lordships held that a private motor vehicle is a motor vehicle belonging to a particular person, or which is for the use of a particular person or group, and for the carrying of their personal effects and not for public use or for hire or reward.
READ ALSO: Nigerian Road Traveller From London To Lagos Crashes
In conclusion, His Lordship Joseph Eyo Ekanem, JCA held that, ‘‘Before drawing the curtain on this judgment, I need to remind public bodies and public officers that a public body or public officer vested with statutory power must take care not to exceed or abuse its or his power.
“It or he must keep within the limits of the authority committed to it. This is to prevent arbitrariness and the rule of man rather than the rule of law. See Wilson v. Attorney-General of Bendel State (1985) 1 NWLR (pt. 4) 572, at 591.
“The Vehicle Inspection Officers went beyond the powers vested in them by the law and the Road Traffic Regulations, by violently stopping the private motor vehicle of the Respondent on a public highway, using menacing tactics and dangerous implements to demand for Certificate of Road Worthiness which the said vehicle is not required to have.
“Such conduct sends a wrong signal to the citizens who may adopt such strong-arm tactics as a means of settling disputes’’.
Thereafter, the Appeal was dismissed.
Meanwhile, the representation for the Appellants include; O. Monye, Esq. (Director, Civil Litigation, Ministry of Justice, Delta State, (with him, G. I. Ugbechie, Esq – Senior State Counsel).