PRINCIPLE STATEMENT

Once the pleadings and the evidence of a party conclusively disclose a representative capacity and it is clear that the case was fought throughout in that capacity, the trial court can properly and justifiably enter judgment for and or against the party concerned in such representative capacity, even if an amendment to reflect that capacity had not been applied for and obtained.

RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)

Per Iguh, JSC, in Kyari v. Alkali & Ors (2001) NLC-2241993(SC) at p. 34; Paras A–C.
"Once the pleadings and the evidence of a party conclusively disclose a representative capacity and it is clear that the case was fought throughout in that capacity, the trial court can properly and justifiably enter judgment for and or against the party concerned in such representative capacity, even if an amendment to reflect that capacity had not been applied for and obtained."
View Judgment

EXPLANATION / SCOPE

Where pleadings and evidence clearly show a party sues or is sued in a representative capacity, and the case was fought on that basis, the court may enter judgment accordingly—even without formal amendment. The substance of representation matters more than technical pleading. The opposing party was not misled; they knew the capacity in which the party acted. This prevents injustice from technical non-compliance where real representation is obvious. However, the disclosure must be conclusive, not ambiguous. The principle applies where capacity is apparent from the entire record. The court will not allow technicality to defeat justice where representation was clear.

CASES APPLYING THIS PRINCIPLE