IN THE HIGH COURT OF LAGOS STATE
IN THE IKE3A JUDICIAL DIVISION (GEN & CIVIL)
TODAY WEDNESDAY THE 8TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2008
BEFORE THE HON. JUSTICE G. M. ONYEABO - JUDGE
SUIT NO: ID/458M/2007
BETWEEN:
MOROOF AYINDE LATEEF CLAIMANT
AND
NIG. BAR ASSOCIATION DEFENDANT
IN THE IKE3A JUDICIAL DIVISION (GEN & CIVIL)
TODAY WEDNESDAY THE 8TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2008
BEFORE THE HON. JUSTICE G. M. ONYEABO - JUDGE
SUIT NO: ID/458M/2007
BETWEEN:
MOROOF AYINDE LATEEF CLAIMANT
AND
NIG. BAR ASSOCIATION DEFENDANT
RULING
I had reason lo raise the issue of jurisdiction on 16/9/08 when the Ruling ought to have been read. The position is that the-Court, though can raise such an issue suo muto is enjoined to give counsel the opportunity to address it before making a pronouncement one way or the other.
The Applicant obtained an adjournment for the purpose and took liberty to file a Written Brief dated in that regard. The Written Address dated 22 September 2008 was filed along with a Further Affidavit deposed to by the Applicant himself. He adopted the said submission at the resumed hearing on 7 October 2008.
Learned Counsel Mr. A. A, Adewale appeared on behalf of the Respondent and informed the Court he had filed certain Processes which had not been served. As staled on the occasion, the said Process could not be countenanced by the Court at that time and counsel was requested to address the Court on the issue of jurisdiction. Mr. Adewale submitted that the Respondent was not juristic and that the applicant could not file in his firm name thus making the Processes incompetent. He also submitted that the subject matter of the originating summons was non justiciable and urged that same be dismissed.
The Applicant replied and submitted that Learned Counsel Mr. Adewale had filed no counter affidavit and could therefore not be heard in respect of the originating process.
The issue of jurisdiction is fundamental and must first be resolved when raised -
- AFRO CONTINENTAL (NIGERIA) LTD & ANOR V CO-OPERATIVE ASSOCIATION OF PROFESSIONAL INC (2003) 5 NWLR (PT. 813) 303
- F.H.A. v JOHN SHOY INT'L LTD (2005) 1 NWLR (PT. 908) 637
Jurisdiction has 3 constituents - the Court must be properly constituted with respect to the number and qualifications) of the members, the subject matter of the suit must be one within the competence of that Court,, and the suit must be properly constituted in compliance with due process -
- MADUKOLU v NKEMDILIM (1962) (SCNLR 341
Where one of these 3 components fail, the jurisdiction of the Court will be compromised. In respect of the 3rd component the constituent of same is that there must be proper parties before the Court. In oilier words only juristic persons may be parties to a suit. These are natural persons, or persons who are so clothed with juristic garbs by statute e.g. bodies corporate-
- ATAGUBA 81 CO. V GURA (NIG) LTD (2005) 8 NWLR (PT. 927) 429
In the instant case, the Respondent is named as Nigerian Bar Association (Ikeja Branch). Question is whether the said NBA (Ikeja Branch) is a legal entity or personality able to sue or be sued as named. The issue came up squarely in the case of GANI FAWEHINMI v NIGERIAN BAR ASSOCIATION & ORS (No. 2) (1989) 2 NWLR (PT.105)
The Supreme Court, while listing jural units having legal personality held that the Nigerian Bar Association does not owe its creation to any statute, neither is it incorporated by virtue of any statute and therefore it is not cooperation. It was held that the NBA was not a suable legal entity and therefore could not be sued eo nominee.
In the instant case, the Respondent as listed is the even the Ikeja Branch of the association. There is no doubt that the Respondent as named is not clothed with legal personality to be suable as has been done here. It follows therefore that the suit is not properly constituted there being no Respondent before the Court. The jurisdiction of the court is therefore clearly eroded and anything done by it will amount to a nullity. Accordingly, this suit is hereby dismissed.
However, as trial Court I am enjoined to consider all the matters/issue before the court so that, the suit on appeal should be. The Comprehensive issues may be before the superior curt
I .shall now consider the originating process itself in case I am wrong on the issue of jurisdiction so the court would have the comprehensive full issues.
The applicant by his originating summons dated 23July 2007 seeks the following;-
1 Declaration that the applicant diploma certificates are professional and no law in Nigeria prohibiting the diplomas and preclude the applicant from claiming title of his trained profession as commercial law practitioner protected by section 15 (2) and 17 (3) a of constitution (supra)
2 Declaration that the applicant is a commercial law practitioner by virtue of his diploma certificates and have legitimate and constitutional rights to claim and practice same for means of his livelihood guaranteed by S 15(2), 16 (l)d, 17 (1),(3) a & 39 of 1999 constitution of the federal republic of Nigeria.
3 Declaration that the applicant have (sic) legitimate and constitutional rights to issue and file any legal instrument for self and/or client(s)with representation without wig and gown as provided under Order 13 R 34 of the high court of Lagos state civil procedure Rules 2004 and section 16 (1) d, (2) c, 17 (l),(,3)a & 36 (I) of the-.1999 constitution of the federal republic of Nigeria. .
4 Declaration that the economy in Judicial systems in Nigeria is not operates in such a manner as to permit the concentration of wealth, means of production, exchange and dissemination of information in the hands of the Respondents and its entire members only which violate Sections 16(10d, (20c, 17(10, (2) a, (30 a and 36 (1) of 1999 Constitution of Federal Republic of Nigeria and Applicant is equally entitled.
5 AN ORDER to restrain, and restraining the Respondent and any of its members, agent(s), servant(s), privies or whosoever name may be called from further arresting intimidating, harassing, visiting communicating, detaining or do anything whatsoever with Applicant in practicing his own profession under his registered Business Name at the determination of this application."
There was filed in support an affidavit of 23 paragraphs deposed to by the applicant himself who also filed a Written Brief in support as required certain documents were attached including a certificate of Diploma in Business and Industrial Law ostensibly issued by the University of Lagos, an Advanced Diploma in Commercial Law and practice of same university of Lagos, copy of Certificate of Registration of business name issued ostensibly by the Corporate Affairs Commission (Exhibit MA 002, Charge Sheet in F/36/2003 as Exhibit MA 003, Charge Sheet C/45/2002 as Exhibit MA 004, Record of Proceedings in F/36/2003 of 5 March 2004 as Exhibit MA 005 and Writ of Summons and Statement of Claim in ID/16/2002 as Exhibit MA 006, and an Application in Suit ID/557 M/2006 as Exhibit MA 007.
Apart from an Affidavit of Service shown to have been filed wherein the Vice Chairman of the NBA (Ikeja Branch) was said to have been served, (See also endorsed copy of Process attached) this Court also made an Order for the attendance of the President of the NBA, Ikcja Branch. I do not think there is a 'president' for the NBA Ikeja Branch but the purport of the order is clear which is for leadership of the Ikeja branch of the association to participate as appropriate having been sued. Hearing Notices were also so ordered . On the adjourned date, the 1st vice Chairman, D. A. Adetomobi of counsel did appear for the defendants and sought a short adjournment to take certain steps but learned counsel Mr. Adetomobi never again appeared in the matter, neither did any other counsel attend on behalf of the defendant. What is more, ho Process was filed on behalf of the defendant.
The Applicant conducted his case himself and adopted his written address as filed. He' also sought to withdraw paragraph 22 of his Affidavit in support and apologized for same. Same is hereby struck out.
This suit is based on the allegation of intimidation and harassment caused the applicant by the respondent. It is also alleged that he (applicant) had been maliciously prosecuted in respect of his claims as a commercial law practitioner" -paragraphs 7 -10 of the Affidavit in Support.
The applicant avers also that lie had a right to so practice as a "Chartered Administrator and Commercial Law Practitioner by virtue of the registration of his business name with the Corporate Affairs Commission and the Diploma Certificates attached - see Exhibits MA. 001 (a), MA 001(b), and M A 002 respectively and paragraphs 3, 4, 5-6 of the Affidavit in Support.
Applicant contends that he has a right to practice as specified once he did not do so in the barristers' wig and gown customarily worn by legal practitioners in this jurisdiction x and particularly since the Judiciary was funded by tax payers' money and not by the NBA Ikeja Branch and its members - see paragraph 17 of Affidavit in Support. Applicant relies on several sections of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and in particular Sections 17 and 39 of same which is under Chapter II, It
states inter alia
"17.
(1) The state social order is founded on ideals of Freedom, Equality and Justice.
(2) In furtherance of the social order
(a) every citizen shall have equality of rights, obligations and opportunities before the law; -------
(e) dependence, impartiality and integrity of Courts of Law, and easy accessibility thereto shall secured and maintained."
Section 39 of the 1999 Constitution deals with the right to freedom of expression and the press and same shall be reproduced as necessary hereafter.
The crucial issue in this application is whether the applicant can rightly hold himself out as a practitioner of commercial law. Or whether there is any such profession known to the Nigerian law, - law being the mechanism by which different professions are identified and regulated. Thus, in the case of accountants, a person may not be able to practice as a chartered accountant unless he becomes or obtains either the ACCA or its recognized equivalent. There being an enabling law to that effect.
It will not matter whether he has obtained a degree from a recognized institution like a university.
In respect of the legal practice, the legal Practitioners Act 1962 as amended section 2 of same provides:
" (1) Subject to the provisions of this Act, a person shall be entitled to practice as a barrister and solicitor if, and only if, his name is on the role."
Section 7(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, a person shall be entitled to have his name enrolled if and only if
(a) he has been called to the Bar by the Benchers; and
(b) he produces a certificate of this call to the Bar to the Registrar
Section 4 (!) Subject to the provisions of this section .a person shall be entitled to be called to the Bar if -
(a) he is a citizen of Nigeria; and
(b) He produces a qualifying certificate to the Benchers; and
(c) He satisfies the Benchers that he is of good character.
(4) The Benchers shall issue to every person called to the Bar pursuant to subsections (1) and (2) of this section a certificate of call to the Bar which shall be in such form as the Benchers may determine" (emphasis supplied).
- also Section 24 of the Act.
The combined effect of these of these provisions is that the Benchers are responsible for admitting a person to the Nigerian Bar. And before he is so admitted, he must present to the Benchers a qualifying certificate, which he must present also to the Registrar of the Supreme Court who then enters this name on the roll Section 2(1) supra.
In the instant case, what the applicant needs to establish is that he has satisfied these requirements and has his name on the roll, the pre-requisite for which is a "certificate of call to the Bar" - Sec Section 4(4) supra.
None of the exhibits filed along with this summons is a certificate issued by the Benchers or council of Legal Education. There is not one piece of evidence suggesting that the applicant made an attempt to undergo the requisite training undertaken by the Council of Legal Education at the law school to qualify for enrollment. Instead, he relies on his Diplomas from the University of Lagos and registration at the Corporate Affairs Commission. The latter has nothing whatsoever to do with authorizing a person to practice as a legal practitioner. And the provisions cited above shown clearly that whilst many people may read law at any University of their choice at home or abroad, only those admitted to the Bar by the Benchers may practice that profession and be correctly referred to as legal practitioners a registration of a business name at the Corporate Affairs Commission not withstanding. I hold that the applicant cannot be said to be a person entitled to practice as a legal practitioner not having been called to the Bar nor enrolled as prescribed.
Applicant has argued that: he is entitled to practice as a Commercial Law Practitioner and Chartered Administrator as long as he does not dorn the wig and gown,
This is quite obviously a misconception. A citizen cannot of his own privately coin or birth a profession of due process. As stated earlier, an enabling enactment is essential or mandatory to so establish and regulate entrance and practice of a profession for obvious reasons one of which is to prevent the activities of charlatans and impostors, This is for the good of the society. Thus, lo lay claim to a right to practice this profession the applicant has a duly to refer to the law/enactment establishing the profession of Chartered Administrators and (2) Commercial Law Practitioner see for such a statute will provide a definition of those who may be admitted to it and their recognized qualifications0. He has the burden of proof. This has not been so in the instant case and there is a total failure in that regard. I so hold.
It remains lo say that a person who breaches or does not comply with the provisions of the enabling law in respect of any profession may make himself liable for sanctions. Thus, by Section 22 of the Legal Practice Act certain action will attract sanctions and are called offences namely Section 22 (10 Subject to the provisions of the section, if any person other than a legal practitioner
(a) practices, or holds, himself out to practice, as a legal practitioner; or
(b) -----
(c) Willfully takes or uses any name, able, addition or description falsely implying or otherwise pretends that he is a legal practitioner or is 'qualified or recognized by law to act as a legal practitioner; or
(d) —-
he is guilty of an offence, and liable -------
(emphasis supplied)
By virtue of this provision, members of the Bar ought ordinarily to be vigilant to ensure compliance with the Act, and where necessary enforce its provisions.
Having held earlier that the applicant has either proved that he is qualified under the Legal Practice 1962, took practice Law as he postulates, nor has he demonstrated to the Court that there is a profession known as the chartered Administrators and Commercial Law practitioner, this application lacks merit and fails in its entirety, same is accordingly dismissed.
I had reason lo raise the issue of jurisdiction on 16/9/08 when the Ruling ought to have been read. The position is that the-Court, though can raise such an issue suo muto is enjoined to give counsel the opportunity to address it before making a pronouncement one way or the other.
The Applicant obtained an adjournment for the purpose and took liberty to file a Written Brief dated in that regard. The Written Address dated 22 September 2008 was filed along with a Further Affidavit deposed to by the Applicant himself. He adopted the said submission at the resumed hearing on 7 October 2008.
Learned Counsel Mr. A. A, Adewale appeared on behalf of the Respondent and informed the Court he had filed certain Processes which had not been served. As staled on the occasion, the said Process could not be countenanced by the Court at that time and counsel was requested to address the Court on the issue of jurisdiction. Mr. Adewale submitted that the Respondent was not juristic and that the applicant could not file in his firm name thus making the Processes incompetent. He also submitted that the subject matter of the originating summons was non justiciable and urged that same be dismissed.
The Applicant replied and submitted that Learned Counsel Mr. Adewale had filed no counter affidavit and could therefore not be heard in respect of the originating process.
The issue of jurisdiction is fundamental and must first be resolved when raised -
- AFRO CONTINENTAL (NIGERIA) LTD & ANOR V CO-OPERATIVE ASSOCIATION OF PROFESSIONAL INC (2003) 5 NWLR (PT. 813) 303
- F.H.A. v JOHN SHOY INT'L LTD (2005) 1 NWLR (PT. 908) 637
Jurisdiction has 3 constituents - the Court must be properly constituted with respect to the number and qualifications) of the members, the subject matter of the suit must be one within the competence of that Court,, and the suit must be properly constituted in compliance with due process -
- MADUKOLU v NKEMDILIM (1962) (SCNLR 341
Where one of these 3 components fail, the jurisdiction of the Court will be compromised. In respect of the 3rd component the constituent of same is that there must be proper parties before the Court. In oilier words only juristic persons may be parties to a suit. These are natural persons, or persons who are so clothed with juristic garbs by statute e.g. bodies corporate-
- ATAGUBA 81 CO. V GURA (NIG) LTD (2005) 8 NWLR (PT. 927) 429
In the instant case, the Respondent is named as Nigerian Bar Association (Ikeja Branch). Question is whether the said NBA (Ikeja Branch) is a legal entity or personality able to sue or be sued as named. The issue came up squarely in the case of GANI FAWEHINMI v NIGERIAN BAR ASSOCIATION & ORS (No. 2) (1989) 2 NWLR (PT.105)
The Supreme Court, while listing jural units having legal personality held that the Nigerian Bar Association does not owe its creation to any statute, neither is it incorporated by virtue of any statute and therefore it is not cooperation. It was held that the NBA was not a suable legal entity and therefore could not be sued eo nominee.
In the instant case, the Respondent as listed is the even the Ikeja Branch of the association. There is no doubt that the Respondent as named is not clothed with legal personality to be suable as has been done here. It follows therefore that the suit is not properly constituted there being no Respondent before the Court. The jurisdiction of the court is therefore clearly eroded and anything done by it will amount to a nullity. Accordingly, this suit is hereby dismissed.
However, as trial Court I am enjoined to consider all the matters/issue before the court so that, the suit on appeal should be. The Comprehensive issues may be before the superior curt
I .shall now consider the originating process itself in case I am wrong on the issue of jurisdiction so the court would have the comprehensive full issues.
The applicant by his originating summons dated 23July 2007 seeks the following;-
1 Declaration that the applicant diploma certificates are professional and no law in Nigeria prohibiting the diplomas and preclude the applicant from claiming title of his trained profession as commercial law practitioner protected by section 15 (2) and 17 (3) a of constitution (supra)
2 Declaration that the applicant is a commercial law practitioner by virtue of his diploma certificates and have legitimate and constitutional rights to claim and practice same for means of his livelihood guaranteed by S 15(2), 16 (l)d, 17 (1),(3) a & 39 of 1999 constitution of the federal republic of Nigeria.
3 Declaration that the applicant have (sic) legitimate and constitutional rights to issue and file any legal instrument for self and/or client(s)with representation without wig and gown as provided under Order 13 R 34 of the high court of Lagos state civil procedure Rules 2004 and section 16 (1) d, (2) c, 17 (l),(,3)a & 36 (I) of the-.1999 constitution of the federal republic of Nigeria. .
4 Declaration that the economy in Judicial systems in Nigeria is not operates in such a manner as to permit the concentration of wealth, means of production, exchange and dissemination of information in the hands of the Respondents and its entire members only which violate Sections 16(10d, (20c, 17(10, (2) a, (30 a and 36 (1) of 1999 Constitution of Federal Republic of Nigeria and Applicant is equally entitled.
5 AN ORDER to restrain, and restraining the Respondent and any of its members, agent(s), servant(s), privies or whosoever name may be called from further arresting intimidating, harassing, visiting communicating, detaining or do anything whatsoever with Applicant in practicing his own profession under his registered Business Name at the determination of this application."
There was filed in support an affidavit of 23 paragraphs deposed to by the applicant himself who also filed a Written Brief in support as required certain documents were attached including a certificate of Diploma in Business and Industrial Law ostensibly issued by the University of Lagos, an Advanced Diploma in Commercial Law and practice of same university of Lagos, copy of Certificate of Registration of business name issued ostensibly by the Corporate Affairs Commission (Exhibit MA 002, Charge Sheet in F/36/2003 as Exhibit MA 003, Charge Sheet C/45/2002 as Exhibit MA 004, Record of Proceedings in F/36/2003 of 5 March 2004 as Exhibit MA 005 and Writ of Summons and Statement of Claim in ID/16/2002 as Exhibit MA 006, and an Application in Suit ID/557 M/2006 as Exhibit MA 007.
Apart from an Affidavit of Service shown to have been filed wherein the Vice Chairman of the NBA (Ikeja Branch) was said to have been served, (See also endorsed copy of Process attached) this Court also made an Order for the attendance of the President of the NBA, Ikcja Branch. I do not think there is a 'president' for the NBA Ikeja Branch but the purport of the order is clear which is for leadership of the Ikeja branch of the association to participate as appropriate having been sued. Hearing Notices were also so ordered . On the adjourned date, the 1st vice Chairman, D. A. Adetomobi of counsel did appear for the defendants and sought a short adjournment to take certain steps but learned counsel Mr. Adetomobi never again appeared in the matter, neither did any other counsel attend on behalf of the defendant. What is more, ho Process was filed on behalf of the defendant.
The Applicant conducted his case himself and adopted his written address as filed. He' also sought to withdraw paragraph 22 of his Affidavit in support and apologized for same. Same is hereby struck out.
This suit is based on the allegation of intimidation and harassment caused the applicant by the respondent. It is also alleged that he (applicant) had been maliciously prosecuted in respect of his claims as a commercial law practitioner" -paragraphs 7 -10 of the Affidavit in Support.
The applicant avers also that lie had a right to so practice as a "Chartered Administrator and Commercial Law Practitioner by virtue of the registration of his business name with the Corporate Affairs Commission and the Diploma Certificates attached - see Exhibits MA. 001 (a), MA 001(b), and M A 002 respectively and paragraphs 3, 4, 5-6 of the Affidavit in Support.
Applicant contends that he has a right to practice as specified once he did not do so in the barristers' wig and gown customarily worn by legal practitioners in this jurisdiction x and particularly since the Judiciary was funded by tax payers' money and not by the NBA Ikeja Branch and its members - see paragraph 17 of Affidavit in Support. Applicant relies on several sections of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and in particular Sections 17 and 39 of same which is under Chapter II, It
states inter alia
"17.
(1) The state social order is founded on ideals of Freedom, Equality and Justice.
(2) In furtherance of the social order
(a) every citizen shall have equality of rights, obligations and opportunities before the law; -------
(e) dependence, impartiality and integrity of Courts of Law, and easy accessibility thereto shall secured and maintained."
Section 39 of the 1999 Constitution deals with the right to freedom of expression and the press and same shall be reproduced as necessary hereafter.
The crucial issue in this application is whether the applicant can rightly hold himself out as a practitioner of commercial law. Or whether there is any such profession known to the Nigerian law, - law being the mechanism by which different professions are identified and regulated. Thus, in the case of accountants, a person may not be able to practice as a chartered accountant unless he becomes or obtains either the ACCA or its recognized equivalent. There being an enabling law to that effect.
It will not matter whether he has obtained a degree from a recognized institution like a university.
In respect of the legal practice, the legal Practitioners Act 1962 as amended section 2 of same provides:
" (1) Subject to the provisions of this Act, a person shall be entitled to practice as a barrister and solicitor if, and only if, his name is on the role."
Section 7(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, a person shall be entitled to have his name enrolled if and only if
(a) he has been called to the Bar by the Benchers; and
(b) he produces a certificate of this call to the Bar to the Registrar
Section 4 (!) Subject to the provisions of this section .a person shall be entitled to be called to the Bar if -
(a) he is a citizen of Nigeria; and
(b) He produces a qualifying certificate to the Benchers; and
(c) He satisfies the Benchers that he is of good character.
(4) The Benchers shall issue to every person called to the Bar pursuant to subsections (1) and (2) of this section a certificate of call to the Bar which shall be in such form as the Benchers may determine" (emphasis supplied).
- also Section 24 of the Act.
The combined effect of these of these provisions is that the Benchers are responsible for admitting a person to the Nigerian Bar. And before he is so admitted, he must present to the Benchers a qualifying certificate, which he must present also to the Registrar of the Supreme Court who then enters this name on the roll Section 2(1) supra.
In the instant case, what the applicant needs to establish is that he has satisfied these requirements and has his name on the roll, the pre-requisite for which is a "certificate of call to the Bar" - Sec Section 4(4) supra.
None of the exhibits filed along with this summons is a certificate issued by the Benchers or council of Legal Education. There is not one piece of evidence suggesting that the applicant made an attempt to undergo the requisite training undertaken by the Council of Legal Education at the law school to qualify for enrollment. Instead, he relies on his Diplomas from the University of Lagos and registration at the Corporate Affairs Commission. The latter has nothing whatsoever to do with authorizing a person to practice as a legal practitioner. And the provisions cited above shown clearly that whilst many people may read law at any University of their choice at home or abroad, only those admitted to the Bar by the Benchers may practice that profession and be correctly referred to as legal practitioners a registration of a business name at the Corporate Affairs Commission not withstanding. I hold that the applicant cannot be said to be a person entitled to practice as a legal practitioner not having been called to the Bar nor enrolled as prescribed.
Applicant has argued that: he is entitled to practice as a Commercial Law Practitioner and Chartered Administrator as long as he does not dorn the wig and gown,
This is quite obviously a misconception. A citizen cannot of his own privately coin or birth a profession of due process. As stated earlier, an enabling enactment is essential or mandatory to so establish and regulate entrance and practice of a profession for obvious reasons one of which is to prevent the activities of charlatans and impostors, This is for the good of the society. Thus, lo lay claim to a right to practice this profession the applicant has a duly to refer to the law/enactment establishing the profession of Chartered Administrators and (2) Commercial Law Practitioner see for such a statute will provide a definition of those who may be admitted to it and their recognized qualifications0. He has the burden of proof. This has not been so in the instant case and there is a total failure in that regard. I so hold.
It remains lo say that a person who breaches or does not comply with the provisions of the enabling law in respect of any profession may make himself liable for sanctions. Thus, by Section 22 of the Legal Practice Act certain action will attract sanctions and are called offences namely Section 22 (10 Subject to the provisions of the section, if any person other than a legal practitioner
(a) practices, or holds, himself out to practice, as a legal practitioner; or
(b) -----
(c) Willfully takes or uses any name, able, addition or description falsely implying or otherwise pretends that he is a legal practitioner or is 'qualified or recognized by law to act as a legal practitioner; or
(d) —-
he is guilty of an offence, and liable -------
(emphasis supplied)
By virtue of this provision, members of the Bar ought ordinarily to be vigilant to ensure compliance with the Act, and where necessary enforce its provisions.
Having held earlier that the applicant has either proved that he is qualified under the Legal Practice 1962, took practice Law as he postulates, nor has he demonstrated to the Court that there is a profession known as the chartered Administrators and Commercial Law practitioner, this application lacks merit and fails in its entirety, same is accordingly dismissed.
