LEGAL PRINCIPLE: STATUTORY INTERPRETATION – Harmonious Construction – Sections 12 and 15 of Agricultural Credit Guarantee Scheme Fund Act
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
S.12 of the law did not give the respondent the total right to sue but only 'to endeavour to recover the amount outstanding' at first instance. This section must be read together with S.15 of the said Act, and in so doing only s. 15 allowed the respondent to sue the Board to recover the outstanding amount of the loan.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Kalgo, JSC, in Alhaji Lawal Sarkin Tasha v. Union Bank of Nigeria Plc (2001) NLC-171996(SC) at p. 3; Paras A–C.
"S.12 of the law did not give the respondent the total right to sue but only 'to endeavour to recover the amount outstanding' at first instance. This section must be read together with S.15 of the said Act, and in so doing only s. 15 allowed the respondent to sue the Board to recover the outstanding amount of the loan."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Statutory provisions must be read harmoniously to give effect to the entire legislative scheme. Section 12 gives the bank power to “endeavour to recover”—this is not an unqualified right to sue. Section 15 expressly provides that proceedings shall be instituted by or against the Board. Reading both sections together, only the Board has standing to sue. The bank’s role is preliminary recovery efforts; once litigation becomes necessary, the Board must act. Harmonious construction prevents conflict and gives meaning to both provisions. The bank cannot rely on Section 12 alone to bypass Section 15’s clear mandate.