LEGAL PRINCIPLE: CHIEFTAINCY LAW — Registered Declarations — Effect of Repeal or Revocation of Enabling Law
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
A registered declaration derived its root, existence, and validity from the enabling law. Once the application of that enabling law has been revoked, the declaration has no legal root upon which it can continue to stand.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Onu, JSC, in Lipede & & Ors v. Sonekan & Anor (1995) NLC-721989(SC) at pp. 16–17; Paras. E–A.
"a declaration such as Exhibit 18 derived its root, existence and validity from section 4 in Part 2 of the Chiefs Law. It is a piece of delegated legislation made pursuant to the powers conferred by that section. Once, as shown in this case, the application of section 4 itself had been revoked by W.S.L.N. No.6 of 1976. Exhibit 18 has no legal root upon which it can continue to stand."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
A registered declaration is valid only as long as its enabling law remains in force. Revocation of the enabling law invalidates the declaration. The principle applies to chieftaincy declarations and similar instruments. The court will declare such declarations null and void. The rule ensures that delegated legislation has a legal foundation. The party relying on the declaration must show that the enabling law is still in force.