LEGAL PRINCIPLE: JUDGMENTS AND ORDERS — Obedience to Court Order — Effect of Alleged Nullity
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
As long as a court order subsists, whether null or not, those affected are bound to obey it. The trial court was right to set aside a selection made in breach of an ex parte order.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Edozie, JSC, in Ndayako & Ors v. Dantoro & Ors (2004) NLC-1862002(SC) at pp. 25–26; Paras A–C.
"By the force of the weighty decisions referred to above, it is plain that learned counsel for the appellants cannot be right in his contention that the ex-parte order in question was a nullity and not capable of being breached. As long as it subsisted, whether null or not, those affected thereby are bound to obey it and the trial court was right and the Court of Appeal justified in affirming the decision of the trial court to set aside the selection of the 1st appellant as the Emir of Borgu on 12/2/2000 in breach of the ex-parte order exhibit NB/1."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Court orders must be obeyed while subsisting, even if allegedly null. The principle applies to all courts. Disobedience constitutes contempt. The rule upholds judicial authority. The proper remedy is to challenge the order, not disobey it. The principle is fundamental.