School Ownership: Court Dismisses Suit Against Retired Supreme Court Justice, Others

Justice A. Ityonyiman of the High Court of Justice of Benue State has dismissed a suit brought by Isaac Ochenjele and three others, claiming the ownership of Livingstone Academy, Anmoda Road, Oglweu in Ohinmi local government area of the state.

The suit was dismissed on the ground that sufficient argument and credible evidence were not made to substantiate their claims as the owners of the school.

Apart from Ochenjele, also joined as co-plaintiffs were Mrs Deborah Durojaiye, Mercy Ochenjele and Livingstone AcademyAnmoda Oglewu Limited.

The defendant in the suit were Justice James Ogebe, a retired Supreme Court justice;  Abu Isah Noah, Alex Edeoja, Ejelekwu Ochinta and Ogah Idoga.

The plaintifs prayed the  court for the following reliefs: A declaration that the plaintiffs were the beneficial owners of the Livingstone Academy, Anmoda Road, Oglewu.

A declaration that the action of the defendants in breaking into the plaintiffs’ school premises on September 9, 2024 and forcefully taking over its operationsl, changing the locks to the offices, collecting school fees and dissipating the resources of the school was unlawful and amounted to trespass.

An order for the defendants to pay to the 4th plaintiff (Livingstone Academy) the sum of N5,035,000.00 and also account for all other monies they collected as school fees and for any other reason from the students of the 4th plaintiff from September 9, 2024, when they forcefully took over the administration of the school to September 19, 2024, when the police dislodged them from the school and the sum of N100 million being damages for the defendants’ trespass on the school premises from

The plaintiffs had argued that the late Pastor Samuel Ochenjele in his lifetime, established the Livingstone Academy Anmoda at its present location.

They told the court that the late pastor acquired the land on which it is located, built the school premises, and started the school as a co-educational institution.

“That he sought and was granted Phases 1, Il and III approval by the Benue State Ministry of Education to operate as a fully registered secondary school. That he appointed James Durojaiye as the assistant school administrator who later became the administrator, and also appointed him as the principal, and the 3rd plaintiff (Mercy Ochejele)

as the bursar. That they have been running the school smoothly and peaceably until September 9, 2024 when the 2nd to 5th defendants rudely interrupted the peace and tranquility of the school by forcefully breaking into the school during the absence of the school administrator and the principal.

The defendants led by Justice Ogebe (rtd) disproved the arguments of the, plaintiffs.

They also argued that allegation of forcefully taking over the school, thereby destroying property worth millions of naira; was false.

After listening to counsel that represented parties in the suit, the court dismissed the case of the plaintiffs, saying that they have failed to prove their claims.

The court held, “I have carefully considered the arguments proffered by the parties. The learned senior counsel is making a case of the locus standi of the 4th plaintiff to present this suit. His contention is that 4th plaintiff is not Livingstone Academy established in 2001, 21 years before the 4th defendant was incorporated. That the 4th plaintiff did not exist during the lifetime of the late Pastor Samuel Ochenjele and remains totally unknown to the deceased. That only a party with a substantiated legal right has legal authority to seek a remedy for the breach or injury to that legal right vide Thomas v. Olufosoye [1986] 1 NWLR (pt. 18) 669 @ 689-690 paras H-F.

“That the 4th plaintiff failed to reflect in its pleading and evidence its legal right to seek declarations, injunctions and damages in this suit against the defendants and therefore lacks the focus standi to institute and maintain this suit”.

The court further held, “To begin with, late late Pastor Samuel Ochenjele from whom the plaintiffs draw their breath and strength, died in the year 2020.The 4th plaintiff was incorporated in the year 2022 – see Exhibit P12. The supposed ‘alter ego’ of 4th plaintiff died two years before the birth of the 4th plaintiff. The 1st -3rd plaintiffs are not shown to be either directors or shareholders. How then can they draw from the fountain of the pre-incorporation contract? | have my doubts whether that claim can avail the plaintiffs.

“Additionally, paragraph one of the amended claim, introduced the 4th Plaintiff as a company with RC No. 1921788 carrying on the business of rendering educational services including the Livingstone Academy Anmoda, Oglewu. The school being one of the services rendered by the 4th Plaintiff cannot be fused together with the 4th Plaintiff. In effect, it cannot stand on equal footing with the person or body rendering the said service and | so hold.

“The thrust of the arguments of the defence on the issue is whether the 4” Plaintiff with her status as in Exhibit P12, has the legal right or authority to seek a remedy for the breach or injury to that legal right. That only a party with a substantiated legal right has the legal authority to seek a remedy for the breach or injury fo that legal right.

“The law is that for a person to have focus standi to institute an action, he has to show that he has special interest, that the interest is not vague, or intangible, supposed or speculative, or that it is not an interest which he shares with other members of the society. He also has to show that such interest has been adversely affected by the act or omission which he seeks to challenge –

“The suit is therefore a cul-de- sac. In other words, plaintiffs have not proved their claim on the preponderance of evidence. The claim must therefore fail. It fails and it is hereby dismissed;’ the court ruled.