Locus Standi (92)
"In ascertaining whether the plaintiffs in an action have locus standi, the pleadings, i.e. the statement of claim must disclose a cause of action vested in the plaintiffs. Thomas v. Olufosoye (1986) 1 N.W.L.R.(Pt. 18) 669 at 685 to 688 para. B. The averment in the pleadings will disclose the rights and obligations or interests of the plaintiffs which have been violated." TIMOTHY ADEILO ADEFULU & ORS v. BELLO OYESILE & ORS (1989) LPELR-91(SC) Per Obaseki, J.S.C. (P.54, Paras.B-D)
"Thus in Nigeria the requirement of locus standi is constitutionally defined in civil cases by reference to the criterion that only the person or persons whose civil rights or obligations are in issue can institute any particular suit. It is thus a threshold issue in that the facts showing that right of the plaintiff to sue must be disclosed in the statement of claim". TIMOTHY ADEILO ADEFULU & ORS v. BELLO OYESILE & ORS (1989) LPELR-91(SC) Per Nnaemeka Agu, J.S.C. (P.71, Paras.D-F)
In determining whether a Plaintiff has the necessary locus to institute an action, it is his pleadings that would be considered by the court. The Claimant must show sufficient interest in the subject matter of the dispute. Emeziv. Osuagwu (2005) 12 NWLR (Pt. 939) 340; Momoh & Anor. v. Olotu (1970) 1 ALL NLR 117; A.G Anambra State v. A.G Federation & Ors. (2005) 9 NWLR (Pt. 931) 572. [Po 159] Para. G Nyesom v. Peters ide & Ors [2016] 2 M. J. S. C (Pt. I)
Locus standi has been defined as the legal capacity to institute an action in a court of law. Where a Plaintiff lacks locus standi to maintain an action, the court will lack the competence to entertain his complaint. It is therefore a threshold issue which affects the jurisdiction of the court. Daniel v. INEC (2015) LPELR - 5C. 757/2013; Thomas v. Olufosoye (1989) 1 NWLR (Pt. 18) 669; Opobiyi & Anor. v. Layiwola Muniru (2011) 18 NWLR (Pt. 1278) 387. [Po 159] Paras. E-F Nyesom v. Peters ide & Ors [2016] 2 M. J. S. C (Pt. I)
"The term "locus standi" denotes legal capacity to institute proceedings in a court of law. It is used interchangeably with terms like "standing" or "title to sue." PER FATAYI-WILLIAMS, J.S.C. (P. 22, paras. D-E) SENATOR ABRAHAM ADE ADESANYA v. PRESIDENT OF THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA & ANOR.(1981) LPELR-147(SC)
"It is a common ground in all the jurisdictions of the common law countries that the claimant must have some justifiable interest which may be affected by the action or that he will suffer injury or damage as a result of the action.
"Admittedly, in cases where a plaintiff seeks to establish a "private right" or "special damage", either under the common law or administrative law, in non-constitutional litigation, by way of an application for certiorari, prohibition, or mandamus or for a declaratory and injunctive relief, the law is now well settled that the plaintiff will have locus standi in the matter only if he has a special legal right or alternatively, if he has sufficient or special interest in the performance of the duty sought to be enforced, or where his interest is adversely affected. What constitutes a legal right, sufficient or special interest, or interest adversely affected, will, of course, depend on the facts of each case.
"The issue of locus standi is a condition precedent to the determination of a case on merit. Where a plaintiff has no locus standi to bring a suit, the suit becomes incompetent and the court lacks the jurisdiction to entertain it, the only order the court can make in the circumstance is that of dismissal." Per ADEKEYE, J.S.C (P 44 ,Paras B-D) DR. TOSIN AJAYI V. PRINCE (MRS.) OLAJUMOKE ADEBIYI & ORS(2012) LPELR-7811(SC)
"Locus standi and jurisdiction are interwoven in the sense that locus standi goes to affect the jurisdiction of the court before which an action is brought. Thus where there is no locus standi to file an action, the court cannot properly assume jurisdiction to entertain the action.
"The guiding principles to determine whether a person has locus standi or not are: a. He must be able to show that his civil rights and obligations have been or are in danger of being infringed. b. The fact that a person may not succeed in the action is immaterial. c. Whether the civil rights and obligations having been infringed depends on the particulars of the case. d. The court should not give any unduly restrictive interpretation to the expression locus standi.