Agbule v. W.R. & P. Co. Ltd.  6 NWLR (Pt. 1350) 318 at 341, paras. B-C, per Ogunbiyi, JSC:
“It goes without saying therefore that a defendant/respondent who did not protest against the name used and in fact filed processes… cannot now be heard to complain at this stage. This is because he is deemed to have waived his right and is therefore estopped from contending the contrary as rightly submitted by the learned appellant’s counsel. The wrong use of the name did not overreach or put the respondent to any form of disdain in the absence of any earlier complaint thereof. The use of the name in my view is, at best, a misnomer and which did not occasion any negative effect. This court under its inherent powers has the jurisdiction to correct such inconsequential error which did not require any formal application to be made.”
The Supreme Court relied on its earlier decision in the case of Afolabi v. Adekunle (1983) 8 SC 98.
(Visited 2 times, 1 visits today)