Compulaw - 1st Indigenous Digital Law Library

Brief

Competence of Court – Determination of
Jurisdiction – Meaning of and importance of
Jurisdiction – How determined
Supreme Court – Whether can only hear appeals from Court of Appeal
Issues for determination
Reply brief

Facts

This is an appeal against the judgment of the Court of Appeal, Abuja Division, hereinafter referred to as Court below, delivered on 9th June, 2003, which judgment upheld the decision of the trial High Court of Ankpa in Kogi State of Nigeria which dismissed the defendant's preliminary objection to the jurisdiction of the trial Court.

The Appellant was the Defendant before the Ankpa High Court of Kogi State where the Respondent as Plaintiff had claimed from the Defendant the sum of $60,000 US Dollars or its then current Naira approximate equivalent which was N6,000,000 (Six Million Naira only), being debt allegedly owed to the Plaintiff arising from a contract of service between the Appellant and Respondent.

On the 10th August, 2000, the Plaintiff, hereinafter referred to as the Respondent filed his Statement of Claim in the said suit No. AHC/18/2000. Upon receipt of the initiating process of the action, the Defendant, hereinafter referred to as the Appellant filed an application on 23rd February, 2001 wherein it prayed, inter alia, for the following:

"An order striking out this suit for being incompetent on ground of lack of jurisdiction."

In support of the said application, the Appellant/Applicant filed an affidavit of 18 paragraphs while the Respondent filed a counter-affidavit to oppose on 2nd February, 2001 and a further counter-affidavit filed on 18/3/2001. After taking argument of counsel on the application, the trial Court ruled as follows:

"I have carefully considered the arguments advanced by learned Counsel on both sides. It is my view that it will be premature to strike out this case, at this stage since there is nothing to show that this Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain this action.

In the circumstances, Applicant's prayer that this case be struck out on grounds of want of jurisdiction is premature and it can therefore not be granted at this stage. Hence that application is refused." See page; 29 of the record.

The Appellant was dissatisfied with the ruling of the trial Court leading to the appeal to the Court below on two Grounds of Appeal and raised two issues therefrom for determination by the Court below. The Appeal was found by the Court below to be lacking in merit hence it was dismissed with costs in favour of the Respondent. That has led to the further appeal to this Court.

Musaconi Ltd V. Aspinall (2013) CLR 6(f) (SC)

Judgement delivered on June 14th 2013

Brief

Facts

Issues