Is It Proper To Simultaneously Claim For Possession, Trespass And Perpetual Injunction?

CASE CITATION: CHIEF M. A. OKUPE v. B. O. IFEMEMBI (1974) 3 S.C. 71 @ 78 Para 5-15

DATE OF JUDGMENT: ON FRIDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF MARCH, 1974
COURT: SUPREME COURT
SUIT: SC. 223/72

CORAM:
1. GEORGE B. A. COKER (Presided and Delivered the Leading Judgment)
2. GEORGE S. SOWEMIMO
3. DANIEL O. IBEKWE

ISSUE(S): Simultaneous Claim For Possession, Trespass And Perpetual Injunction – whether proper

CASE SYNTHESIS

We have on several occasions condemned the inclusion of a claim for possession with claims involving trespass and perpetual injunction. Where the defendant is a trespasser the remedy of injunction is a complete answer to his act of ouster for by his mere entry on the land the trespasser does not obtain the necessary possession on which to found a claim for recovery. It follows therefore that if the plaintiff succeeds in his claim for trespass and an injunction is ordered, the claim for possession is a negation of the very facts on which that for trespass must be founded. Such a claim ought not therefore to be joined with the other claims.

CHIEF M. A. OKUPE v. B. O. IFEMEMBI (1974) 3 S.C. 71 @ 78 Para 5-15

Click to Read Full Judgment