utumunta: You ppl in d ACN are becoming very pathetic wt each passing day! Whinning and pouting like a spoilt child dat must have his way by all means.
If u know anything about d law, u'd know dat ds Judgement is apt and is celebrated by Daniel in heaven!
State 'of' connotes "state coming from" . Just as 'southern sudan' means southern part of d con3 sudan and south sudan means an independent entity located in d south! If u are called koruji of nairaland, it is either u work wt nairaland or u are a member. It means u ar an entity within nairaland!
In law,there is what is called rules of statutory interpretation and it nid nt conform wt any dictionary.
Lagos state does nt have a 'state of Lagos' bt Ikeja local council area 'of Lagos', located in and belonging to Lagos state!
Something can never stand on nothing in law and d maxim 'Nemo dat quod non habet' means 'u cannot give a better title dan u have' .
Ds same Judgement is going to be brought against d merger party shld INEC go ahead and assign d acronym APC to them.
It is a shame dat all d SAN 'of' ACN do not guide them well.

claycares: Let's not be sentimental about this issue. OP pls seek legal advice when necessary.
There's a long standing precedent of the Supreme Court on this issue. The law is clear and certain whether it's an SAN or not, PDP or what have you. The 'State of Lagos' is different from 'Lagos State' and so is 'Federal Govt of Nigeria' diff from 'Federal Republic of Nigeria'. It is trite law that you cannot substitute a non-juristic person with a juristic person. The Constitution only gave legal personality to Lagos State or Federal Republic of Nigeria as the case may be and not otherwise. There's a long chain of case law on this issue, yet we keep seeing SANs making this blunders everyday.

utumunta: You ppl in d ACN are becoming very pathetic wt each passing day! Whinning and pouting like a spoilt child dat must have his way by all means.
If u know anything about d law, u'd know dat ds Judgement is apt and is celebrated by Daniel in heaven!
State 'of' connotes "state coming from". Just as 'southern sudan' means southern part of d con3 sudan and south sudan means an independent entity located in d south! If u are called koruji of nairaland, it is either u work wt nairaland or u are a member. It means u ar an entity within nairaland!
In law,there is what is called rules of statutory interpretation and it nid nt conform wt any dictionary.
Lagos state does nt have a 'state of Lagos' bt Ikeja local council area 'of Lagos', located in and belonging to Lagos state!
Something can never stand on nothing in law and d maxim 'Nemo dat quod non habet' means 'u cannot give a better title dan u have' .
Ds same Judgement is going to be brought against d merger party shld INEC go ahead and assign d acronym APC to them.
It is a shame dat all d SAN 'of' ACN do not guide them well.

koruji: Where is your precedence that says "Osun State" cannot be called "State of Osun"?

ITbomb: All these English na wa o
By the way, Land of Naira and Nairaland can never be the same. sine quo non

claycares:

I don’t really like it when you appear to insult people on forums. We are meant to solve issues in forums. And you don’t have to be negatively aggressive all the time.

This post will be quite lengthy and as I said before there’s a long chain of precedents to guide us here. I’m not at home now, so I’ll make do with my previous written arguments in court with similar issue. I’ll add more cases when I get home.

Although there is no direct pronouncement on the issue of State of (Lagos) by an appellate court in Nigeria. I don’t know of any for now. However, there are lots of cases to bind the courts to favour ‘Lagos State’ as against ‘State of Lagos’. Unless the appellate court is willing to overrule itself on this.

Response
1. The Constitution referred to the states in s.3 as States of the Federation and not State of Lagos.

2. By convention, these federating units (entities) in Nigeria have always used the word state in addition to and at the end of their names. Why the sudden change and would that help our law?

3. What then is the position of the law as to discrepancies in names of juristic persons whether natural or artificial? To answer this question, we have to embark on a voyage to case law.

Supreme Court decision on natural persons
In Esenowo v. Ukpong (1996) 6 NWLR (Pt.608) 611, there was disparity in the name of the Appellant who is a Medical Practitioner and the name in the register of the Medical Council. The name with which the Appellant was operating was stated as “Dr. E.J. Esenowo”, while the name on the register of the Medical and Dental Council was stated as “Dr. J.E. Esenowo.” In rejecting the argument that the two names are the same, the Supreme Court held at page 621, paragraphs B-D as follows:

“… the gravamen of this appeal was that the Plaintiff signed Exhibit P and P1 as “Dr. E.J. Esenowo” whereas the name listed in the 1980 Nigerian Medical Register reads “Dr. J.E. Esenowo”. Ordinarily, there is a world of difference in the arrangement of the initials listed in Exhibit E and those stated in Exhibit P and P1 by the Plaintiff… Clearly, there was need to furnish some lucid explanation otherwise it would be unacceptable to accede, by the judgment of the trial Judge, that it will be too simplistic to hold that the name “Dr. E.J. Esenowo” is the same as “Dr. J.E. Esenowo.”

Put pointedly, “State of Lagos” is not a person known to law at present and as such, cannot be a victim of crime or enforce one. It does not have a standi. The kernel of this argument is that the ‘State of (Lagos)’ has NEVER been given judicial pronouncement in our case law but Lagos State has been pronounced upon.

Court of Appeal on corporate entities (artificial entities)
This is the category where States fall in. The law with respect to proper names of corporate entities, be it corporation sole or corporation aggregate is even stricter, as no corporate entity can validly act outside the name with which the entity is registered or incorporated. The courts have recognized this point and have in several cases reiterated this principle over and over again. Once there is such alteration in the name of the party in a judicial proceeding, such has always been treated as being a fundamental defect which renders the entire proceedings a nullity. In Fagbola v. Titilayo Plastic Ind. Ltd. (2005) 2 NWLR (Pt.909) 1 at 19-20, paragraphs F-A, Murtaka-Coomassie, JCA, stated the principle as follows:

“The circumstances of the appointment of the receiver/manager in this case are quite in doubt and not properly made and the illusory position of the different names. These cannot be termed irregularities. They are fundamental defects. In other words, the whole affairs surrounding the appointment of the receiver/manager were shrouded in confusion and uncertainty, making me to believe that those defects were fundamental which cannot be readily cured.…In the case at hand, the name on the originating process is “Simon Fadeyibi” while on the one said to be appointed as a receiver is “Simon Ololade Fadeyibi.” (underlining supplied)

Similarly, in the more recent case of Umar v. W.G.G. (Nig) Ltd. (2007) 7 NWLR (Pt.1032) 117, the respondent which is an incorporated company was sued in respect of a contract in which its name appeared as White Gold Ginnery Limited as against its real name which is White Gold Ginnery Nigeria Limited. In striking out the action against the company as Respondent, Kekere-Ekun, JCA, held at page 142 paragraphs E-H as follows:

“By virtue of Section 37 of the Companies and Allied Matters Act, Cap 59, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 1990 the respondent in this appeal can only contract, sue and/or be sued in its corporate name: White Gold Ginnery Nigeria Ltd. As found by the learned trial Judge in his ruling there is no ambiguity regarding the fact that from the record before the court, all the transactions were between the two Appellants and a Company called White Gold Ginnery Ltd and not White Gold Ginnery Nigeria Ltd (the present respondent)…The facts before the courts were that the appellants based their application against the respondent, White Gold Ginnery Nigeria Ltd on documents executed between them and a company called White Gold Ginnery Ltd. I am unable to fault the finding of the learned trial judge that the appellants had failed to establish their locus to institute the proceedings against the respondent.”

Based on the foregoing, it is my submission that, the argument that says ‘(Lagos) State and ‘State of (Lagos)’ are the same is a bankrupt argument and an exercise in futility. Secondly, the law at present favours (Lagos) State as against State of (Lagos) because Lagos State has been pronounced on in a plethora of cases but State of Lagos has never seen the light of day. Thirdly, under the doctrine of stare decisis, the courts will let a sleeping dog to lie. Thus, the law as it now will not be disturbed. See Attorney-General Lagos State v. Eko Hotels Ltd. (2008) All FWLR (Pt. 398) 235; ADEJUMO AND ANOR v. GOVERNOR OF LAGOS STATE (citation omitted)

I hope this piece helps to resolve this issue.

thirty:
Nice write up. But as a lawyer dont you see anything wrong about the judgemewnt. because of branding an entity, you are supporting a criminals. Mind you, the judge has set another judicial precedent for other court of law to follow in encuraging crime. Secondly, did the constitution really against the change/branding of name of state. I am not lawyer but mind you this learners' forum.

eldoradoxx: You are not a lawyer, its a pity. Here what I know from my small knowledge of law. In a criminal trial there are two parties namely; the accused person and the prosecution (I.e the state). Both parties must be proper persons at law otherwise the trial becomes a nullity. In the instant case the court rightly held that an offence cannot be committed nor a non legal/juristic person that is State of Lagos prosecute an accused. Therefore, until the juristic/legal person (I.e Lagos State)comes forth to prosecute the accused has no valid charge against him. Solution is to re-arrest the accused and the juristic person/ Lagos State (known to law) initiates anothr trial. So the judge did absolutely nothing wrong. Lagos State is different from State of Lagos. If they claim the constitution only calls it Lagos without adding "State" then its better to call it "Lagos" simpliciter and not State of Lagos. The state after Lagos is simply sort of descriptive of what Lagos is, a state. But State of Lagos denotes an independent entity created for and by the people of Lagos. But that s false, all states in Nigeria were created by the people of Nigeria and for all Nigerians and no state belongs to any set of people, tribe or religion.

koruji: This is the kind of self-contradiction that happens when we let politics override logic. If you agree that the constitution only name the states but we have being using "Lagos State" without heartache why would anyone suddenly develop one because it is now refeered to as "State of Lagos" which by the way is the most common reference to states around the world. It does connote anything other than the state known as Lagos, as in city of "Los Angeles".

eldoradoxx: Nigeria's federalism is quite different from America. In America, most of the federating states where formerly independent and autonomous with Identifiable names; they all came together under a union while retaining some of their autonomy to form a "United States" of America. In our own case, the Nation itself emerged first before the states. There was no state that was created other than those created by the legislature deriving powers from the constitution. That is why a state in US can stil pull out from the Union and that will be allowed. But it is impossible in Nigeria.

koruji: The meanings of these designations have nothing to do with the origin/history of the states. Neither do "New York City" and "City of New York" - they are equivalent and to raise a brouhaha over the difference between the two, as in the case of this judge, is to be wasting the nation's resources.

eldoradoxx: city of Lagos is not the same as state of Lagos.

koruji: What's the point? Nobody said they are the same, but "city of Lagos" is the same as "Lagos city".

eldoradoxx: Koruji, please understand that city is not the same as State. Therefore city of Lagos connotes different meaning from Lagos state and state of Lagos