Justice Karibi-Whyte: The Glorious Exit Of An Uncommon Jurist

By Mike Ozekhome, SAN

The Hon Justice Adolphus Godwin Karibi-Whyte recently passed on
to the great beyond at 88. Kabiri-Whyte would be remembered, not
just as an uncommon Jurist of great lucidity and untrammelled
knowledge of the law, but also, as one of the few that became
Professors of Law and worked their way from the Judicial rung up to
the Supreme Court of Nigeria. Justice Niki Tobi fell into this
exceptional category.

The legal icon, prolific writer and author of many law books and
about 55 academic papers, hailed from Abomema, Rivers State. His
many achievements literally litter the Nigerian and international
political and legal landscapes, having been a Judge of the
International Criminal Court at the Hague, and Chairman of the
Nigerian Constitutional Conference of 1994-1995.

By 1973, Karibi-Whyte was Solicitor-General of Rivers state. His
illustrious judicial career later took him to the then Federal
Revenue Court (now Federal High Court, 1976-1980); Court of Appeal
(1980-1984); and the Supreme Court of Nigeria (1984-2002).
Karibi-Whyte is reputed to have become the second, only after
former Chief Justice of Nigeria, Dr, Tashim Olawale Elias, to have
moved directly from the academia to the Judiciary.

On the socio-economic and political fronts, late Karibi-Whyte
chaired many Judicial and Administrative Commissions and Tribunals
of Inquiry. His achievements did not escape the attention of
successive Nigerian governments, as he was honoured, first with the
Commander of the Order of the Niger (CON, 1998) and the Commander
of the Federal Republic (CFR, 2008). The intellectual prodigy is
usually discussed at parity with, and within the hallowed Pantheon
of unforgettable judicial sages, such as Justices Idowu Conrad
Taylor; Chukwudifu Oputa; Olayinka Ayoola; Kayode Eso; Andrews
Otutu-Obaseki; Anthony Aniagolu; Udo Udoma; Chukwuweinke Idigbe;
Ayo Fatayi-Williams; Mohammed Bello; Samson Uwaifo; Lawal Uwais;
Ekundayo Ogundare; Nnamaeka-Agu; Niki Tobi; and many more (not
necessarily in any particular order of superiority or
preference).

Born January 29,1932, with university education in London,
England and university of Lagos, Nigeria, Karibi-Whyte is reputed
to have delivered very powerful seminar dissenting judgements,
which greatly rattled majority decisions, and formed the
cornerstone of future judicial reviews and a shift by the apex
court from earlier positions. We remember such legendary opinions
in GOVERNMENT OF GONGOLA STATE V TUKUR (1989) 4
NWLR (PT. 117) 517; GRACE JACK V UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURE,
MARKURDI (2004) 5 NWLR (PT.865) 208, SAVANAH BANK
OF NIGERIA LTD, PAN ATLANTIC SHIPPING & TRANSPORT LTD
(1987) 1 S.C. 198; and, PATKUM INDUSTRIES LTD V NIGER SAGES
MANUFACTURING CO.LTD. (1988) JELR 47914 (SC).

NOW THIS

Let us take short bites from some of Karibi-Whyte’s seminar
pronouncements which he made, with refreshing lucidity and
considerable intellectual depth.

FRANCIS ASANYA V. THE STATE (1991) LPELR-574
(SC):“It is well settled that a confession if properly
established is always admissible.”

ODUBEKO V. FOWLER & ANOR (1993) LPELR-2235
(SC):”The findings of fact of the trial Judge is not to be
lightly interfered with, unless where it is shown to be perverse,
or does not follow from the evidence before the Court”
(P.38, Paras. A-B).

STATE v. OGBUBUNJO (2001) LPELR-3223 (SC):

“The law is that an appellate court will not quash a
conviction or reverse a judgment where it is clear that expunging
the admitted inadmissible evidence will not alter the decision of
the court appealed against- See Queen v. Haske (1961) 2 SCNLR
90” (P. 39, paras. E-F).

FAMESE & ORS v. KAYODE & ORS (2017)
LPELR-43233(CA):

“As Karibi-Whyte, JSC stated in S.G. Bank v. Saraki
(2000) 81 LRCN 3015 at 30-35D “I do not think this Court can
tolerate a situation where an error which can be corrected without
prejudice or injustice to either party, should be allowed to remain
uncorrected because the adverse party would wish it so.”
Per DANJUMA, J.C.A. (P. 8, Paras. C-E) 

UNITED BANK FOR AFRICA LIMITED V. STAHLBAU GMBH & CO.
KG. (1989) LPELR-3400 (SC):

“A judicial discretion must be exercised on fixed
principles and according to rules of reason and
justice.”

FRN v. YAHAYA (2014) LPELR-23284 (CA):

“…Karibi-Whyte JSC in AJAO V ALAO [1986] NWLR (Pt 45)
802 had this to say an evaluation of facts and assessment of
evidence by trial court. “It is well settled in our law that
matters relating to evaluation of facts, assessment of evidence and
consideration of veracity in the testimony of witnesses are
essentially and intrinsically questions of fact to be determined
primarily by the Court of trial – see KISIEDU & ORS V DOMPREH & ORS
(1935) 2 WACA 253 FATOYINBO V WILLIAMS (1956) I FSC 37.”
Per AWOTOYE, J.C.A. (Pp. 12-13, paras. F-A).

EGUAMWENSE V. AMAGHIZEMWEN (1993) LPELR-1049
(SC):

“A declaratory judgment will be granted where the
justice of the case demands it more than any other
remedy.” (P. 16, para. B).

AMBODE v. AGBAJE & ORS (2015) LPELR-25667
(CA):

“The apex Court in Saraki v. Kotoye (supra) held:
“Grounds of Appeal are not formulated in nubibus. They must be in
firma terra, namely arise from the judgment. However, meritorious
the ground of appeal, based either on points of critical
constitutional importance or general public interest, it must be
connected with a controversy between parties. This is the
pre-condition for the vesting of the judicial powers of the
constitution in the Courts.” Per HUSSAINI, J.C.A. (Pp.
19-20, Paras. F-B).

EGE SHIPPING & TRADING IND. INCO. & ORS. V. TIGRIS INTL.
CORP. (1999) LPELR-1041(SC):

“So long as the statement of claim discloses some cause
of action or raises some issues fit for determination the mere fact
that the case is weak and not likely to succeed is not sufficient
ground for striking it out.” (P. 37, paras. B-C).

CHAKA v. MESSRS AEROBELL (NIG.) LTD (2012)
LPELR-8392(CA):

“…the lawful use and occupation of the land and premises
implies on agreement to pay damages for such use and occupation of
the land and premises. It is a quasi-tenancy which the law
recognizes. It is not based on accepted landlord and tenant
relationship. Per Karibi-Whyte, JCS at 420 paragraphs D –
F.” PER SAULAWA, J.C.A. (P.27, Paras. D-F).

AG, FEDERATION V. AG, ABIA STATE & ORS.(-R)
(2001) LPELR-631(SC):

“It is now fairly settled law that it is the cause of
action as endorsed on the writ of summons that determines the
proper parties before the court. – See Okoye v. NCFC (1991) 6 NWLR
(Pt.199) 501; Afolayan v. Ogunrinde (1990) 1 NWLR (Pt.127)
369.” (DISSENTING) (P. 95, paras. B-C)

MAGAJI v. MATARI (2000) LPELR-1813 (SC):

“It is both fundamental and elementary principle in the
adjudicatory process that where the jurisdiction of the Court or
the Judge is in issue in respect of a matter, that issue must first
be considered and disposed of. See Kalio v. Daniel-Kalio (1975) 2
SC. 15. This is because any determination in the absence of
jurisdiction is a nullity“. (P.14, Paras.E-F).

COMMISSIONER FOR WORKS, BENUE STATE & ANOR V. DEVCON
DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANTS LTD & ANOR (1988) LPELR-884
(SC):

“It is a well settled principle of law that where there
is a legal right to do a thing, the motive with which it was done
is generally immaterial to its validity – See Mayor and Corporation
of Bradford v. Pickles (1894) 3 Ch.53.” (P. 26, paras.
C-D)

JIMOH V OYINLOYE (2006) 15 NWLR (PT. 1002) PG.
402 PARAS A-B:

“Also in the case of Awoniyi v. Reg. Trustee Amore
(2000) 6 SCNJ 141 at 156;(2000) 10 NWLR (Pt. 676) 522 at 540 the
Supreme Court per Karibi- Whyte, JSC stated as follows: “The
purpose of joinder of parties in an action is to enable the court
to effectually and completely adjudicate upon and settle all
questions involved in the cause or matter – See Oladeinde & Anor.
v. Oduwole (962) WNLR 41.” Per Muntakar-Coomasie JCA.

ALAO V. ACB LTD. (2000) LPELR-408 (SC):

“The exercise of the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court
is statutory and its powers are circumscribed by the provisions of
the Constitution and rules of practice made thereunder See Again
Adigun v. A. G. of Oyo State (1987) 2 NWLR (Pt.56) 197“.
(P.24, para.F).

AND THIS

Karibi-Whyte, a Ph.D. holder, who traversed the Nigerian
judicial universe like the colossus that he was, retired from the
Supreme Court in 2002, having attained the mandatory constitutional
retirement age of 70. The reasons behind his powerful dissenting
opinions were deep, profound, luminous, resonating and
courageous.

Surely, Karibi-Whyte perfectly fits into Mark Anthony’s
description of Julius Caesar: “His life was gentle; and the
elements so mixed in him, that Nature might stand up and say to all
the world, THIS WAS A MAN!” (Julius
Caesar, by William Shakespeare, Act 5,
scene 5, page 5).

Papa, as you have transformed from mortality to immortality, may
the good Lord forgive you your earthly sins and grant you eternal
celestial bliss in His warm bosom. Adieu, uncommon Jurist.
Farewell, brave judicial Activist. Rest in peace, intellectual
giant.

THOUGHT FOR THE WEEK

“We all die. The goal is not to live forever; the goal
is to create something that will.”

• Chuk Palahniuk

“It is not the length of life, but the depth of
life”

• Ralph Waldo Emerson.

LAST LINE

Fellow compatriots, countrymen and women, we shall defeat
Covid-19, by God’s grace. Don’t despair at all. But keep safe.
Continue reading the Nigerian Project by
Chief A. A. Mike Ozekhome, SAN, OFR, Ph.D, FCIArb,
LL.D.

By Mike Ozekhome, SAN

The Hon Justice Adolphus Godwin Karibi-Whyte recently passed on
to the great beyond at 88. Kabiri-Whyte would be remembered, not
just as an uncommon Jurist of great lucidity and untrammelled
knowledge of the law, but also, as one of the few that became
Professors of Law and worked their way from the Judicial rung up to
the Supreme Court of Nigeria. Justice Niki Tobi fell into this
exceptional category.

The legal icon, prolific writer and author of many law books and
about 55 academic papers, hailed from Abomema, Rivers State. His
many achievements literally litter the Nigerian and international
political and legal landscapes, having been a Judge of the
International Criminal Court at the Hague, and Chairman of the
Nigerian Constitutional Conference of 1994-1995.

By 1973, Karibi-Whyte was Solicitor-General of Rivers state. His
illustrious judicial career later took him to the then Federal
Revenue Court (now Federal High Court, 1976-1980); Court of Appeal
(1980-1984); and the Supreme Court of Nigeria (1984-2002).
Karibi-Whyte is reputed to have become the second, only after
former Chief Justice of Nigeria, Dr, Tashim Olawale Elias, to have
moved directly from the academia to the Judiciary.

On the socio-economic and political fronts, late Karibi-Whyte
chaired many Judicial and Administrative Commissions and Tribunals
of Inquiry. His achievements did not escape the attention of
successive Nigerian governments, as he was honoured, first with the
Commander of the Order of the Niger (CON, 1998) and the Commander
of the Federal Republic (CFR, 2008). The intellectual prodigy is
usually discussed at parity with, and within the hallowed Pantheon
of unforgettable judicial sages, such as Justices Idowu Conrad
Taylor; Chukwudifu Oputa; Olayinka Ayoola; Kayode Eso; Andrews
Otutu-Obaseki; Anthony Aniagolu; Udo Udoma; Chukwuweinke Idigbe;
Ayo Fatayi-Williams; Mohammed Bello; Samson Uwaifo; Lawal Uwais;
Ekundayo Ogundare; Nnamaeka-Agu; Niki Tobi; and many more (not
necessarily in any particular order of superiority or
preference).

Born January 29,1932, with university education in London,
England and university of Lagos, Nigeria, Karibi-Whyte is reputed
to have delivered very powerful seminar dissenting judgements,
which greatly rattled majority decisions, and formed the
cornerstone of future judicial reviews and a shift by the apex
court from earlier positions. We remember such legendary opinions
in GOVERNMENT OF GONGOLA STATE V TUKUR (1989) 4
NWLR (PT. 117) 517; GRACE JACK V UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURE,
MARKURDI (2004) 5 NWLR (PT.865) 208, SAVANAH BANK
OF NIGERIA LTD, PAN ATLANTIC SHIPPING & TRANSPORT LTD
(1987) 1 S.C. 198; and, PATKUM INDUSTRIES LTD V NIGER SAGES
MANUFACTURING CO.LTD. (1988) JELR 47914 (SC).

NOW THIS

Let us take short bites from some of Karibi-Whyte’s seminar
pronouncements which he made, with refreshing lucidity and
considerable intellectual depth.

FRANCIS ASANYA V. THE STATE (1991) LPELR-574
(SC):“It is well settled that a confession if properly
established is always admissible.”

ODUBEKO V. FOWLER & ANOR (1993) LPELR-2235
(SC):”The findings of fact of the trial Judge is not to be
lightly interfered with, unless where it is shown to be perverse,
or does not follow from the evidence before the Court”
(P.38, Paras. A-B).

STATE v. OGBUBUNJO (2001) LPELR-3223 (SC):

“The law is that an appellate court will not quash a
conviction or reverse a judgment where it is clear that expunging
the admitted inadmissible evidence will not alter the decision of
the court appealed against- See Queen v. Haske (1961) 2 SCNLR
90” (P. 39, paras. E-F).

FAMESE & ORS v. KAYODE & ORS (2017)
LPELR-43233(CA):

“As Karibi-Whyte, JSC stated in S.G. Bank v. Saraki
(2000) 81 LRCN 3015 at 30-35D “I do not think this Court can
tolerate a situation where an error which can be corrected without
prejudice or injustice to either party, should be allowed to remain
uncorrected because the adverse party would wish it so.”
Per DANJUMA, J.C.A. (P. 8, Paras. C-E) 

UNITED BANK FOR AFRICA LIMITED V. STAHLBAU GMBH & CO.
KG. (1989) LPELR-3400 (SC):

“A judicial discretion must be exercised on fixed
principles and according to rules of reason and
justice.”

FRN v. YAHAYA (2014) LPELR-23284 (CA):

“…Karibi-Whyte JSC in AJAO V ALAO [1986] NWLR (Pt 45)
802 had this to say an evaluation of facts and assessment of
evidence by trial court. “It is well settled in our law that
matters relating to evaluation of facts, assessment of evidence and
consideration of veracity in the testimony of witnesses are
essentially and intrinsically questions of fact to be determined
primarily by the Court of trial – see KISIEDU & ORS V DOMPREH & ORS
(1935) 2 WACA 253 FATOYINBO V WILLIAMS (1956) I FSC 37.”
Per AWOTOYE, J.C.A. (Pp. 12-13, paras. F-A).

EGUAMWENSE V. AMAGHIZEMWEN (1993) LPELR-1049
(SC):

“A declaratory judgment will be granted where the
justice of the case demands it more than any other
remedy.” (P. 16, para. B).

AMBODE v. AGBAJE & ORS (2015) LPELR-25667
(CA):

“The apex Court in Saraki v. Kotoye (supra) held:
“Grounds of Appeal are not formulated in nubibus. They must be in
firma terra, namely arise from the judgment. However, meritorious
the ground of appeal, based either on points of critical
constitutional importance or general public interest, it must be
connected with a controversy between parties. This is the
pre-condition for the vesting of the judicial powers of the
constitution in the Courts.” Per HUSSAINI, J.C.A. (Pp.
19-20, Paras. F-B).

EGE SHIPPING & TRADING IND. INCO. & ORS. V. TIGRIS INTL.
CORP. (1999) LPELR-1041(SC):

“So long as the statement of claim discloses some cause
of action or raises some issues fit for determination the mere fact
that the case is weak and not likely to succeed is not sufficient
ground for striking it out.” (P. 37, paras. B-C).

CHAKA v. MESSRS AEROBELL (NIG.) LTD (2012)
LPELR-8392(CA):

“…the lawful use and occupation of the land and premises
implies on agreement to pay damages for such use and occupation of
the land and premises. It is a quasi-tenancy which the law
recognizes. It is not based on accepted landlord and tenant
relationship. Per Karibi-Whyte, JCS at 420 paragraphs D –
F.” PER SAULAWA, J.C.A. (P.27, Paras. D-F).

AG, FEDERATION V. AG, ABIA STATE & ORS.(-R)
(2001) LPELR-631(SC):

“It is now fairly settled law that it is the cause of
action as endorsed on the writ of summons that determines the
proper parties before the court. – See Okoye v. NCFC (1991) 6 NWLR
(Pt.199) 501; Afolayan v. Ogunrinde (1990) 1 NWLR (Pt.127)
369.” (DISSENTING) (P. 95, paras. B-C)

MAGAJI v. MATARI (2000) LPELR-1813 (SC):

“It is both fundamental and elementary principle in the
adjudicatory process that where the jurisdiction of the Court or
the Judge is in issue in respect of a matter, that issue must first
be considered and disposed of. See Kalio v. Daniel-Kalio (1975) 2
SC. 15. This is because any determination in the absence of
jurisdiction is a nullity“. (P.14, Paras.E-F).

COMMISSIONER FOR WORKS, BENUE STATE & ANOR V. DEVCON
DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANTS LTD & ANOR (1988) LPELR-884
(SC):

“It is a well settled principle of law that where there
is a legal right to do a thing, the motive with which it was done
is generally immaterial to its validity – See Mayor and Corporation
of Bradford v. Pickles (1894) 3 Ch.53.” (P. 26, paras.
C-D)

JIMOH V OYINLOYE (2006) 15 NWLR (PT. 1002) PG.
402 PARAS A-B:

“Also in the case of Awoniyi v. Reg. Trustee Amore
(2000) 6 SCNJ 141 at 156;(2000) 10 NWLR (Pt. 676) 522 at 540 the
Supreme Court per Karibi- Whyte, JSC stated as follows: “The
purpose of joinder of parties in an action is to enable the court
to effectually and completely adjudicate upon and settle all
questions involved in the cause or matter – See Oladeinde & Anor.
v. Oduwole (962) WNLR 41.” Per Muntakar-Coomasie JCA.

ALAO V. ACB LTD. (2000) LPELR-408 (SC):

“The exercise of the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court
is statutory and its powers are circumscribed by the provisions of
the Constitution and rules of practice made thereunder See Again
Adigun v. A. G. of Oyo State (1987) 2 NWLR (Pt.56) 197“.
(P.24, para.F).

AND THIS

Karibi-Whyte, a Ph.D. holder, who traversed the Nigerian
judicial universe like the colossus that he was, retired from the
Supreme Court in 2002, having attained the mandatory constitutional
retirement age of 70. The reasons behind his powerful dissenting
opinions were deep, profound, luminous, resonating and
courageous.

Surely, Karibi-Whyte perfectly fits into Mark Anthony’s
description of Julius Caesar: “His life was gentle; and the
elements so mixed in him, that Nature might stand up and say to all
the world, THIS WAS A MAN!” (Julius
Caesar, by William Shakespeare, Act 5,
scene 5, page 5).

Papa, as you have transformed from mortality to immortality, may
the good Lord forgive you your earthly sins and grant you eternal
celestial bliss in His warm bosom. Adieu, uncommon Jurist.
Farewell, brave judicial Activist. Rest in peace, intellectual
giant.

THOUGHT FOR THE WEEK

“We all die. The goal is not to live forever; the goal
is to create something that will.”

• Chuk Palahniuk

“It is not the length of life, but the depth of
life”

• Ralph Waldo Emerson.

LAST LINE

Fellow compatriots, countrymen and women, we shall defeat
Covid-19, by God’s grace. Don’t despair at all. But keep safe.
Continue reading the Nigerian Project by
Chief A. A. Mike Ozekhome, SAN, OFR, Ph.D, FCIArb,
LL.D.