⦿ CASE SUMMARY OF:
Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) & Ors. v. All Progressives Congress (APC) & ORS (2019) – CA
1. PEOPLES DEMOCRATIC PARTY (PDP);
2. SENATOR DOUYE DIRI (Governorship Candidate of PDP, in the November 16th, 2019 Bayelsa State Governorship Election);
3. SENATOR LAWRENCE EWHRUIJAKPO (Deputy Governorship Candidate PDP, in the November 16th 2019 Bayelsa State Governorship Election)
1. ALL PROGRESSIVES CONGRESS (APC);
2. SENATOR HEINEKEN LOKPOBIRI;
3. LYON DAVID PEREWORINMI;
4. INDEPENDENT NATIONAL ELECTORAL COMMISSION (INEC)
Court of Appeal
⦿ LEAD JUDGEMENT DELIVERED BY:
Bitrus Gyarazama Sanga, J.C.A.
⦿ LAWYERS WHO ADVOCATED
* FOR THE APPELLANT
* FOR THE RESPONDENT
⦿ FACT (as relating to the issues)
The Applicants filed a Motion on notice on 21st November, 2019 seeking for the following reliefs:
1. AN ORDER for leave of the Appellants/Applicants to appeal as Persons interested in the matter in the decision and/or Order of the Court of Appeal Port Harcourt Division made on 15th November, 2019 granting stay of execution or maintenance of status quo ante bellum to the judgment of the Federal High Court Yenagoa in Suit No. FHC/YNG/CS/100/2019, Senator Heineken Lokpbiri Vs. APC and 2 Other (sic) delivered on the 14th November, 2019 per Inyang J. and nullifying the APC Governorship Primary Election in Bayelsa State for the 16th November, 2019 Governorship Election.
2. AN ORDER deeming the notice of appeal dated 20th day of November, filed, as properly filed subject to the payment of appropriate filing fees as accessed.
⦿ ARGUMENTS OF PARTIES
* FOR THE APPELLANT
*FOR THE RESPONDENT
⦿ HOLDING & RATIO DECIDENDI
THE COURT OF APPEAL RULED:
In deciding the application I have judicially taken notice of a similar motion filed by the Applicants on 21st November, 2019 seeking for exactly same reliefs in Appeal No. CA/PH/309M/2019 between PEOPLES DEMOCRATIC PARTY & 2 ORS v. LYON DAVID PEREWORINIMI & 3 ORS. This Court delivered its decision in its Ruling on 17th December, 2019 wherein it refused to grant all the reliefs sought by the Applicants and struck out the application. By the doctrine of STARE DECISIS this Court is bound to abide by its earlier decision where the same points come again in litigation. This presupposes that the law has been solemnly declared and determined in the former motion thus this Court; and all subordinate Courts, are precluded from changing what has been determined. Only the Supreme Court has that jurisdiction to overrule, vary or set aside what has been decided.
In view of the above authorities and constitutional provisions this application filed on 21st November, 2019 cannot be granted. It is refused and accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to cost.
⦿ SOME PROVISIONS
⦿ RELEVANT CASES
⦿ NOTABLE DICTA