CIVIL PROCEDURE — Parties — Joinder — Police as Necessary Party in Arrest and Detention Claims
Ratio Decidendi
Per Muhammad, JSC, in Fajemirokun v. Commercial Bank Nig. Ltd. & Anor (2009) NLC-123-336-2002(SC) at pp. 25; Paras A–B:
"From the above, it appears to me that I prefer to go along with the two lower courts in their decisions in holding that the Police is a necessary party. They played a number of key roles which no one would explain better than themselves, for example, the arrest, detention and temporary denial of use and confiscation of the appellant's mobile telephone. The Police is a necessary party in this case. They ought to have been made co-defendants in the first instance or be joined as a necessary party in order to enable the court effectively and completely adjudicate upon and settle all the questions involved in the case especially those relating to the Police. Failure to make the Police a party is fatal to the claims of the appellant/applicant."
Explanation / Scope
This principle establishes that the Police is a necessary party in claims involving arrest and detention. Where the Police played key roles such as arrest, detention, and confiscation, they must be joined as a party. The principle applies where the Police are involved in the alleged infringement. It ensures that all parties who can explain the events are before the court. The principle reflects the need for complete adjudication. It prevents claims from proceeding without the key actors. The court must require the joinder of necessary parties. The principle provides guidance on joinder in fundamental rights claims.