LEGAL PRINCIPLE: CIVIL PROCEDURE – Locus Standi – Bank’s Standing to Sue Under Agricultural Credit Guarantee Scheme – Statutory Limitation
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
Since section 15 was ignored by the respondent, the action brought at its instance must perforce be incompetent and unmaintainable against the appellant. The issue of locus of the respondent to sue in the first instance was well taken and this denies the trial court and the Court of Appeal the power to entertain and adjudicate on the matter.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Onu, JSC, and Kalgo, JSC, in Alhaji Lawal Sarkin Tasha v. Union Bank of Nigeria Plc (2001) NLC-171996(SC) at pp. 2–3; Paras D–A.
"Since the latter section (section 15) was ignored by the respondent, the action brought at its instance must perforce be incompetent and unmaintainable against the appellant. The issue of locus of the respondent to sue in the first instance was well taken and this denies the trial court and the Court of Appeal the power to entertain and adjudicate on the matter."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Section 15 of the Agricultural Credit Guarantee Scheme Fund Act gives the Board, not the lending bank, the right to sue. When the bank ignores this statutory provision and sues in its own name, the action is incompetent and unmaintainable. The defect goes to locus standi—the bank has no standing. Consequently, the trial court and Court of Appeal lack jurisdiction to entertain the matter. The issue of standing is fundamental; it cannot be waived. Any judgment in such an action is a nullity. The bank cannot circumvent the statute by claiming it also has rights under other provisions. The statutory limitation is absolute and mandatory.