THE LEGISLATIVE LISTS

Justice will not be done to a discussion on this topic without a reference to the three(3) Arms of Government. A government can be likened to a machinery. A machinery is operated by the full performance of different gadgets attached to it, each gadget performing a specific function aiding the operation of the machine. Every government is run by three major gadgets known as the Arms of Government. These are- the Legislature, the Executive and the Judiciary. The Legislature is the arm of the government that makes/enacts the law; the Executive is the arm of the government that executes the law while the Judiciary is the arm of the government that interprets the law. Note that the Media is included as the fourth Arm of Government functioning as the watch dog of the other three.

Nigeria as a nation practices federalism. A federal system of government is a system in which the individual States have control over their own affairs but are controlled by a central government for national decisions  (Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary, 6th Ed.).The government of the federation of Nigeria is divided into three- the Federal Government; the State Government and the Local Government. These are called the Three Tiers of Government. Each tier of government is run by the afore-listed three arms- the Executive, the Legislature and the Judiciary. Our point of focus is on the Legislative arm of each of these governments especially the Federal Government and the State Governments. While the legislative arm of the Federal Government is called the National Assembly, that of the State Government is called the House of Assembly.

Thus, in a political setting like this, one major political challenge is unavoidable- disputes regarding the extent of power of the Legislative House of each government(State or Federal) and the subject matter of the legislation. These challenges are what the Legislative List has come to resolve and the List has effectively reduced the frequency of disputes arising out of power frictions between the Federal and State governments. Thus, there exist three(3) Legislative Lists which define the extent of the legislative powers of the Federal and State governments- the Exclusive List, the Concurrent List and the Residual List.

THE EXCLUSIVE LEGISLATIVE LIST

The Exclusive List contains matters only the Federal Government can legislate upon. This List excludes specifically any State government from exercising its legislative powers on any matter on the List. Section (4)(2) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria(as amended) 1999, provides thus-

“The National Assembly shall have power to make Laws

for the peace, order and good government of the

Federation or any part thereof with respect to any matter

included in the Exclusive List set out in Part 1 of the Second

Schedule to this Constitution”.

If we take a look on the stated Part 1, second Schedule of the Constitution, there we have listed, matters contained in the Exclusive List, about 68 items. Click here for the List.

THE CONCURRENT LEGISLATIVE LIST

This List contains items on which both the Federal and State governments can legislate on. The List empowers both the National Assembly and the State Houses of Assembly to legislate on any item contained in this List. Just as the name depicts, these matters are concurrently legislated upon by both governments. By the provisions of Section(4)(4) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria(as amended) 1999.

“ … the National Assembly shall have power to make laws with respect to…

(a) any matter in the concurrent Legislative List set out in the First

Schedule to this Constitution to the extent prescribed in the second

column opposite thereto…”

I shall restate the second leg of the above provision which describes the partnership nature envisaged in the Concurrent Legislative List.

“… to the extent prescribed in the

second column opposite thereto…”

Part II of the Second Schedule of the Constitution has a list of matters on which both the Federal and State governments can legislate on. Every first column of the Part has an opposite second column. The first column empowers the National Assembly to legislate on the item of reference while the opposite second column gives an equal right to the State Houses of Assembly to legislate on the same item of reference.

THE RESIDUAL LEGISLATIVE LIST

Just as there is specifically what is called the Exclusive Legislative List and the Concurrent Legislative List in the Constitution, there is no such list named the Residual Legislative List in the Constitution.The Residual List is an abstract list compiled from the implied terms of the provisions of Section 4. of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria(as amended), 1999.  In other words, by the combined reading of the provisions of Section 4, the Residual List does exist. The Residual List refers to items that are not in both the Exclusive and Concurrent Lists, which the State Houses of Assembly will indisputably legislate upon. Thus, anything not in the Exclusive and Concurrent List is invariably exclusively reserved for the State governments to legislate upon.

 

Questions, suggestions and contributions are highly welcome.

Check my Mini Law Dictionary here.

You would also like to read JaynnoraStaples and JayFashion.

LEGAL PERSONS

A person, in general parlance means a human being. However, the Law defines a person as both a human being and an entity. This human being/entity is recognized by law and has attached to it certain rights and duties which it enjoys and is obliged to. Any human being/entity recognized by Law as having rights and being liable to duties is called a legal person. In effect, there are two kinds of legal persons, Natural Person and Artificial Person. We are going to focus our discussion on the legal person’s right to sue and to be sued to a law court. In other words, how much qualifications a legal person has to be recognized as a party to an action by a law court.

NATURAL PERSON

A natural person refers to an individual or a human being. You, as a human being, are a natural person. As a natural person, the law empowers you to sue in your name, it also makes you liable to be sued in your name. What this means is that you can commence/institute/file an action in any court of law in your own name as an individual/human being/legal person. Also, a case can be brought/instituted/commenced/filed against you by another legal person(natural or artificial person). Every human being is a natural person who can sue and be sued in his own name. However, some natural persons do not have the legal capacity to sued and by sued by their names alone. These are- a minor, a person of unsound mind, a bankrupt. These persons can sue and be sued through their representatives. Note, that a natural person can only exercise these rights as a living being. In other words, the dead has no personal rights to enjoy nor personal duties to observe(actio personalis moritur cum persona).

ARTIFICIAL PERSON

An artificial person is also called a juristic person. An artificial person is a body corporate consisting of a collection or succession of natural persons. Where a group of persons(two or more) come together to form a body recognized by law, the law accords it(the body) legal personality with the capacity to sue and be sue in its registered name. A good example of an artificial/juristic person is a company registered under the Part A of the Companies and Allied Matters Act, Cap C20, LFN, 2004. Every artificial person is a separate entity different from the persons forming it. It bears its own name, not the names of the persons forming it and so, it commences legal action in that name and a legal action can be brought against it in that same name. It is registered under the law by its name and this name is generally called its corporate name. Thus, a juristic person is a body corporate with the right to sue and be sued in its corporate name.

CONCLUSION

I will give you an encompassing scenario to explain the topic- Lets assume your name is James. James, Kelvin and Jack are three great friends. You all agreed to start up a business with the object of selling agricultural produce. You chose to register the business as a company with the name Jakeja Nig. Ltd. This you did and Jakeja Nig Ltd flourished within a period interval of five years of establishment. You (James) have Samson(a petty trader) as your tenant occupying a three bedroom flat in your apartment. Samson is also a long term customer of Jakeja Nig Ltd. But presently, Samson is experiencing some financial challenges in his petty trade. To this ends, he is owing you(James) three years arrears of rent while he is owing Jakeja Nig. Ltd a debt sum of N1,500,000. How do you sue Samson to recover these debts. Samson is a natural person that can sue and be sued. Jakeja Nig. Ltd is a juristic person that can sue and be sued. James (you) is a natural person that can sue and be sued. Jakeja Nig Ltd is a juristic person that can sue and be sued. Now, James can sue Samson for the arrears of rent in his own name(that is, James). Jakeja Nig Ltd can sue Samson for the sum debt in its corporate name( that is, Jakeja Nig Ltd). James cannot sue Samson for the debt the latter owed Jakeja Nig. Ltd. Why, because Jakeja Nig. Ltd is a separate being distinct from James, even though James is one of the natural persons who formed Jakeja Nig. Ltd. Jakeja Nig Ltd can bring an action against Samson in the name of Jakeja Nig Ltd, not in the name of James nor Kelvin nor Jack nor the three as a whole.

 

Questions, suggestions and contributions are highly welcome.

You would also like to read JaynnoraStaples and JayFashion.

JUDGMENT AND APPEAL

Judgment and appeal are two sensitive words in law suits that cannot be neglected. These words always raise the roof in court cases such that parties are tensed when a day for judgment is fixed. Judgment is defined as the final decision of a court on a matter/case before it. Appeal on the other hand, is reference of a case from a lower court to a higher court for the latter to revisit the decision of the former on the case. A court does not sit on appeal on its own decision/judgment. This means that where judgment is given on your case by the High Court and you are not satisfied with the judgment, you cannot apply to the same High Court to reverse its decision. Reason being that once a court has decided on a case before it, it becomes functus officio. That is, it has completely discharged its duty as far the case is concerned. Therefore, what then is the fate of your appeal where you file an appeal against the judgment of a court given on your case? This, we are going to discuss below.

JUDGMENT.

Judgment can be affirmed/upheld, reversed, overruled or approved, on appeal.

Affirm/Uphold: Judgment given in a case is said to be affirmed/upheld on appeal if the higher court confirms or agrees with the decision of the lower court on the case. Illustratively, if judgment was given in your case by the Magistrate Court and you appealed against the decision to the High Court, and the High Court held thus- “ I hereby uphold/affirm the decision of the Magistrate Court on this case…”. What this means is that you lost both at the Magistrate Court and the High Court. You may accept the decisions of the courts or appeal further to the Court of Appeal.

Reverse: This is where the judgment of the lower court is rejected or turned down on appeal by a higher court. Here, the appellate court reaches an opposite decision from that of the lower court on the case.  In other words, if by the above scenario(see illustration on affirmed/upheld), the High Court did not agree with the decision of the Magistrate Court on your case, it can rightly be said that the judgment on your case was reversed on appeal. The effect of this is that you won on appeal while the Respondent lost. The Respondent may accept the decision of the High Court or appeal further to the Court of Appeal.

Overrule: The judgment of a lower court is said to be overruled on appeal if in a subsequent discussion of the judgment by a higher court in another case, the higher court declares the judgment to be bad law or to be wrong. Illustratively, you commenced an action against Mr. Okeke at the High Court in 2002 and judgment was given in your favour. In 2005, Mr. Ayo brought an action against Chief Kolawole at the High Court and judgment was given in Chief Kolawole’s favour. Mr. Ayo appealed against the judgment to the Court of Appeal. At the court of Appeal, Mr. Ayo cited the judgment of the High Court given in your case with Mr. Okeke as authority. The Court of Appeal looked at the judgment of the High Court in your case with Mr. Okeke and found that the decision was reached erroneously. The Court of Appeal, while giving its judgment in Mr. Ayo’s appeal before it declared the judgment of the High Court in your case to be bad law. This means that the Court of Appeal disagrees with that decision and in so doing, overrules it by declaring it a bad law.

Approve: This is the opposite of an overruled judgment. Judgment is said to be approved if in a subsequent visit of the judgment in a different case by a higher court, the higher court agrees with the reasoning of the judgment. The effect of this is that such approval stars and strengthens the judgment to be reliably cited as authority in any other case with similar issues/circumstances.

APPEAL.

An appeal against the decision/judgment of a lower court may be allowed or dismissed. Where an appeal is allowed, it means that the higher court disagrees with the decision of the lower court on the case being appealed against. This reverses the judgment, and the winner at the lower court becomes the loser. On the other hand, an appeal is dismissed if the higher court agrees with the judgment of the lower court being appealed against. This upholds/affirms the judgment and the winner at the lower court remains the winner at the appeal court.

 

Questions, suggestions and contributions are highly welcome. Please check my Mini Law Dictionary here.

You would also like to read JaynnoraStaples and JayFashion.

 

 

 

 

 

CLASSIFICATION OF COURTS’ JURISDICTIONS

The jurisdiction of courts is an important aspect of the law that cannot be overlooked. A court is always conscious of whether or not a case before it is within its jurisdiction. Our topic discussion is on the classification of the  jurisdiction of courts and its meanings/applications/effects- original jurisdiction, appellate jurisdiction, concurrent jurisdiction, superior jurisdiction…

Original Jurisdiction:

A court is said to have original jurisdiction over a particular subject matter, if it is the court that the Law empowers to sit first over a case bordering on the specified subject matter. In other words, this is the first court the Law says a matter of a particular nature should be taken to. Where a court exercises its original jurisdiction on a matter, it is called a Court of First Instance. The effect of this is that, every legal action must be commenced in a court empowered with original jurisdiction over the subject matter of the case. Thus, an action brought before the wrong court stands to be struck out for want of jurisdiction. I will give you an example- the law empowers the High Court with an original jurisdiction to hear matrimonial causes. The effect of this is, where you have an intention of filing a petition to divorce your wife, the first court to take the petition to is the High Court. In other words, you cannot file the petition before the Magistrate Court. Why? Because, the Magistrate Court has no original jurisdiction to hear divorce suits.

Appellate Jurisdiction:

A court is said to have an appellate jurisdiction if the Law empowers it to hear appeals on a case from lower courts. A court’s appellate jurisdiction is only exercisable when it hears appeals. In other words, the appellate jurisdiction of a court is applied when it is sitting on appeal on a case. Virtually every court in Nigeria has both original and appellate jurisdictions. This means that a court can sit both as a court of first instance and as an appellate court.

Concurrent Jurisdiction:

This refers to a situation where two or more courts are said to be on the same level/status/pedestal of jurisdiction. The effect of this is that no court is deemed greater than the other, jurisdiction wise. Where two or more courts have concurrent jurisdiction, no appeal from one can lie to the other. In other words, none is higher or lower than the other. A good example of courts with concurrent jurisdiction is the High Court of a State, the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory(FCT), the Federal High Court and the National Industrial Court. These courts are of concurrent/coordinate jurisdiction. For instance, where judgment is given in your matter by the High Court of the FCT and you wish to appeal against the judgment, you cannot take the appeal to any of the courts having coordinate jurisdiction with the High court of the FCT. Your appeal can only lie/go to a higher court- the Court of Appeal.

Superior Jurisdiction:

A court is said to be of superior jurisdiction if it is higher in rank than another. NB: there is nothing like inferior court or inferior jurisdiction. A court with superior jurisdiction hears appeal from the court directly next to it in the hierarchical pyramid of courts. Courts with superior jurisdiction are otherwise called superior courts of record. These are courts established by the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999.

 

Questions are highly welcome. Please check my Mini Law Dictionary here.

You would also like to read JaynnoraStaples and JayFashion

 

LEGAL ACTIONS- PARTIES

A legal action is incomplete without parties to the action. A court does not entertain a matter where there is no proper parties to the matter. Who then is a party in a action? A party is any legal person who brings a legal action to the court of law. In every legal action/case/suit/matter/litigation, there must be a party or parties. Where a case is not brought by a person recognized by law, the court strikes out the party or the entire case. Reason being that the issue of party is sacrosanct to a law suit. Litigation can be civil or criminal, so we are going to discuss the various parties in a civil and criminal litigation- the prosecutor, Accused, Plaintiff, Defendant, Petitioner, Respondent, Applicant, Appellant…

Prosecutor: The prosecutor is the party that institutes a criminal proceeding. Apart from the individual victim of a crime, criminal act is deemed committed against the government( the State or the Federation). Thus, crimes are prosecuted by either the State Government or the Federal Government. The Police is also empowered to prosecute crimes. With reference to the Legislative List, where a crime is committed against the State, the prosecution takes place at the High Court of the State. Likewise, a crime against the Federation is prosecuted at the Federal High Court. The Police, on the other hand, prosecute criminal cases at the Magistrate Court. The duty of the prosecutor is to prosecute crime committed against the victim on behalf of the victim as an individual and the society at large. The reasoning behind this is that if a criminal goes unpunished, there is a likelihood that he will extend his criminality to the detriment of the entire society.

Accused: This is the party against whom a criminal action is brought. Thus, a party prosecuted/charged in any court of law with a crime is called the Accused. However, some States ( e.g. Lagos State) use the word “Defendant” rather than ‘Accused’. Reason being that a person accused of a crime is deemed innocent by the law until proven guilty ( Section 36(5) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria(as amended), 1999). The court an accused will be charged to is dependent on the nature of the crime alleged and the prosecutor prosecuting the case( see my explanation above on the prosecutor). An accused may plead ‘guilty’ or ‘not guilty’. Where an accused pleads ‘not guilty’, the law mandates the prosecutor to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt, otherwise, the accused will be discharged and acquitted by the court.

Plaintiff: This is the party that brings/institutes a civil action before a law court. The Plaintiff is the aggrieved party, he is the party who feels he has been wronged and therefore seeks remedy to the wrong done to him. To this end, he files an action against the person who has wronged him. Some States now use the word ‘Claimant’ in the stead of ‘plaintiff’. It thus behoves the plaintiff to establish credible evidence to prove that the party he brought to court is liable to his claim(s).

Defendant: This is the party against whom a criminal or civil action is brought. Like I said earlier above, an accused is also called a Defendant in a criminal litigation(see my explanation above on the accused). In civil matters on the other hand, the Defendant is the party on the opposing side. He is the party a civil action is instituted against. As the word denotes, the Defendant disproves his liability to the claim against him. This he does by establishing evidence countering the Plaintiff/Claimant’s claim against him.

Petitioner: Just like the Plaintiff, the  Petitioner is a party that brings/institutes a civil action in the law court but a particular category of civil actions- divorce or election cases. In other words, parties that file/institute election cases are called ‘petitioners’. For instance, Obi is the Petitioner in a divorce suit he brought against Ada, his wife. Also, Alhaji Tajudeen is the Petitioner in an election matter he brought against Chief Okoye.

Applicant: Some cases are commenced/instituted in the form of applications or motions. A party who brings such an application to court is called the Applicant. An application may be made while a case is already in court or a case may be commenced/brought by way of application. An applicant usually seeks the order of court on a particular issue or the order of court compelling a party to do or refrain from doing an act. Here is a short scenario- If ‘A'’ is constituting himself a nuisance in the premises where you both reside as tenants, you may make an application to court for an order restraining ‘A’ from any further act of nuisance. Thus, by this scenario, you are called the Applicant.

Appellant: An appellant is the party who brings an appeal before a higher court against the decision of a lower court on his case/matter. In other words, this is the party who does not agree with the judgment given on his case and thus has appealed against the judgment to a higher court.

Respondent: The word ‘Respondent"’ is an umbrella word for the party responding to any of the following- (1) an application brought by an Applicant, (2) a petition brought by a Petitioner,  or (3) an appeal brought by an Appellant. See my explanation above on Applicant, Petitioner and Appellant.

 

Questions, suggestions and contributions are highly welcome. Kindly look up the meanings of the words in bold in my Mini Law Dictionary.

You would also like to read JaynnoraStaples and JayFashion.    

THE HIGH COURT AND A HIGHER COURT- DIFFERENCE.

These are confusing topics that we find ourselves using wrongly or interchangeably. Just as the Court of Appeal is different from an appellate court( see my post on the difference), so is the High Court different in meaning from a higher court.

HIGHER COURT

A ‘higher court’ is usually used  comparatively. In other words, as the word ‘higher’ denotes, it means a court of law that is higher than the one it is being compared with. A higher court hears appeal from a lower court. No court in particular is named a ‘higher court’. A court is said to be higher by considering the extent of its jurisdiction and its position of rank in the hierarchical order of courts. In terms of jurisdiction, the Supreme Court is a higher court than the Court of Appeal. For instance, the Supreme Court exclusively has the original jurisdiction to hear and determine disputes arising between the Federation and the State, between States, between the National Assembly and the President, between the National Assembly and any State House of Assembly and between the National Assembly and any State. The parties involved and the sensitivity of the position occupied by the parties could be the reasoning of the legislatures in conferring this jurisdiction on the Supreme Court alone. The effect of this, points to only one direction- that the Supreme Court is not only the highest court but also a higher court than the Court of Appeal or any other court. Invariably, the Supreme Court is a higher court than the Court of Appeal in the order of superiority(see my post on hierarchy of courts).

THE HIGH COURT

The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria mandates that there shall be a High court for each State of the federation.What this means is that every State in the federation has a court known as the High Court. Thus, ‘High Court’ is the name of a court. A High Court is the next court in the order of superiority after the Court of Appeal. Put differently, the Court of appeal is a higher court to the High Court. Apart from the States, the Federal capital territory and the Federation also have their own High Court.They are known as the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory and the Federal High Court, respectively. These three courts- the High Court of a State, the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory and the Federal High Court are all of equal ranking in the hierarchy of courts. In other words, no court is higher than the other. This means that the words ‘Higher Court’ does not exist when making a comparative analysis of these three courts. They are called courts of coordinate jurisdiction. NB: The High court hears appeal from a Magistrate Court.

CONCLUSION

Let me give you an illustrative scenario of the difference- you and Ada agreed to marry, you proposed to her and she accepted. You paid her bride price and fulfilled other traditional rites of the marriage. After 5 years of living together, you both realized that there’s no love lost between the both of you. You both agreed to go your separate ways. You filed a petition for dissolution of marriage at the Customary Court of your village. Ada cross-petitioned, claiming the sum of N100,000 monthly for the upkeep and maintenance of herself and the two kids you have. The Customary court dissolved the marriage and ordered you to pay her the monthly sum claimed. You appealed to the Magistrate Court against the sum awarded against you, the magistrate Court affirmed the decision of the Customary Court. You further appealed to the High Court and lost. You appealed further to the Court of Appeal… By this scenario, while the Customary Court is the court of first instance( that is, the first court you took your matter to), the magistrate court is a higher court to the Customary Court, the High Court is a higher court to the Magistrate Court, the Court of Appeal is a Higher court to the High Court. Thus, the fact that the Magistrate Court is a higher court to the Customary Court does not make the Magistrate Court a High Court. 

 

Questions, suggestions and contributions are highly welcome. Kindly check the meanings of the words in bold in my Mini Law Dictionary.

 

You would also like to read JaynnoraStaples and JayFashion.

THE COURT OF APPEAL AND AN APPELLATE COURT- DIFFERENCE

These two topic words ( ‘Appellate Court’ and ‘Court of Appeal’) are usually used interchangeably by confusing their meanings and applications.Apart from the fact that both refer to a court of law, they also have one thing in common- ‘appeal’. What then is an appeal. An appeal is a matter brought before a higher court from a lower court in order for the higher court to look into the decision of the lower court on the matter. Thus, both an appellate court and the Court of Appeal hear appeals from lower courts(to appreciate this topic the more, see my post on the hierarchy of courts).
APPELLATE COURT
An appellate court is a court that sits on appeal in a particular case brought before it from a lower court. When an appellate court hears an appeal against the decision of a lower court, it either upholds/affirms or reverses the decision of the lower court. A Magistrate court sitting on appeal on a case brought before it from a customary court is an appellate court as far as the case is concerned. Likewise, a High Court sitting on appeal on a matter brought to it from a Magistrate Court. In effect, there is no particular court named/called an appellate court by the law.
COURT OF APPEAL
The Court of Appeal is the second highest court in Nigeria. In other words, the Court of appeal is the court ranking next to the Supreme Court in the hierarchical pyramids of courts. The Court of Appeal is a creation of the Constitution( Section 237 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended), 1999. An appeal from the Court of appeal goes to the Supreme Court( the highest court in Nigeria). The Court of appeal also hears appeal from High Courts, Tribunals and some special courts. In other words, the Court of Appeal is also an appellate court. Thus, while the Court of Appeal is a particular court named as such, it is also an appellate court.
CONCLUSION
I will further clarify the difference with three illustrative scenarios.
First scenario- I claimed that you are owing me the sum of N50,000. I took the matter to the Magistrate court to recover the acclaimed debt. I could not prove my case at the Magistrate Court, so the case was decided in your favour(that is, you won). Aggrieved, I took the matter further on appeal to the High court… At this stage, while the Magistrate court is the first court to hear my matter(otherwise known as court of first instance), the High Court is an appellate court. Why? Because, it sat on appeal on my case against you. So, we say the High court is an appellate court, not a Court of appeal.
Second scenario- On appeal to the High Court, the High Court decides in my favour(that is, I won), thus ordering you to pay me the sum claimed. You felt aggrieved and appealed to the Court of Appeal against the High court’s decision… At this stage, the Court of Appeal( being the second highest court) is an appellate court because it sat on appeal on the decision of the High Court. Thus, it is both the Court of Appeal as well as an appellate court.
Third scenario- The Court of Appeal upholds(agrees with) the decision of the High Court and ordered you to pay me the sum claimed. You appealed to the Supreme Court against the decision of the Court of Appeal… The Supreme Court, apart from being the highest court is also an appellate court in this scenario.
From the three scenarios, the High Court, the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court all acted as appellate courts.While the Court of Appeal is the second in rank in the hierarchy of courts, it is also an appellate court. The High Court can never be the Court of Appeal but it can be an appellate court. 

Questions, suggestions and contributions are highly welcome. Please, check out the meanings of the words in bold in my Mini Law Dictionary.
You would also like to read JaynnoraStaples and JayFashion.

THE PRINCIPLES OF JURISDICTION OF COURTS IN NIGERIA

INTRODUCTION

Jurisdiction is the legal power or authority a court has to hear/entertain a case brought before it. Before a court can rule or determine a case, it will ensure that the subject matter of the case is one which it has the power to hear and determine upon.

Let me give you a scenario, you are a private school proprietor, you employ me as the Vice-proprietor. As the Vice-proprietor, I have been vested with these specific authorities- to teach, to collect school fees from students, to draft the school time-table and to organize/manage the students and teachers. A parent came to my office pleading for a reduction in the sum her child pays as school fees on ground of not being financially bouyant. The question is- do I have the power to increase/decrease the amount paid as school fees? If yes, I will go ahead to consider if the school can afford a reduction in the amount paid as school fees before actually exercising my power. If no, I will politely tell the parent that it is not within my jurisdiction/authority/power to increase or lower the amount paid as fees. As such, I will refer the parent to you, the proprietor. 

The above scenario applies to courts in the exercise of their jurisdictions. See Oduko v. Governor, Ebonyi State (2009) 9 NWLR (Pt. 1147) P. 441 @ 452

THE EFFECT OF LACK OF JURISDICTION

Where a court rules or decides on a matter brought before it, it invariably means that it has jurisdiction to hear a case of such nature. Thus, what is the legal implication/effect where a court decides on a matter it lacks jurisdiction to hear? Below are the effects:

1. Such court embarks on a futile mission, this means that the entire proceedings amount to a nullity.
2. The court acted ultra vires
3. the judgment of the court on the matter has no foundation on which it can stand.
4. The judgment stands to be overruled on appeal by a higher court.

THE REACTION OF COURTS TO THE ISSUE OF JURISDICTION

Courts take the issue of jurisdiction very sensitively. Once a party raises an objection on ground that the matter before the court is outside its jurisdiction, the court must halt every other business in the matter to determine whether or not it has jurisdiction to hear the said case before it. The issue of jurisdiction is sacrosanct and cannot be neglected by a court. Where a court finds out that it has no jurisdiction to hear the case before it, the appropriate order it makes is that of striking out the case. In other words, the court quickly washes its hands off the case saying- I cannot hear this case because I have no power/authority/jurisdiction to do so, take this case away from my court to the appropriate court with jurisdiction to hear and determine the subject of this matter.

THE FATE OF A CASE STRUCK OUT FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION

Where your case is struck out by a court on ground of jurisdiction, that is the end of the case before that very court. But fortunately, you can still take your case to the right/appropriate court. Unfortunately however, you stand a chance of paying a sum as cost to the other party you took to the wrong court, especially where the latter has taken steps in the matter by filling processes in response to your case against it.

WHEN CAN YOU RAISE THE ISSUE OF JURISDICTION

When can a party raise the issue of jurisdiction in court on a matter? The law says- at any stage in the course of the matter, even on appeal. 

Let me illustrate this with another scenario. You sued me to the Lagos State Magistrate Court for declaration of title to a piece of land you claimed belonged to you. (Note: by the provisions of Section 28(7)(a) of the Lagos State Magistrate Court Law, 2009, a Magistrate Court has no jurisdiction to entertain any matter that raises the issue of title to land or any interest in land). 

Thereafter, the Magistrate court gave judgement in your favour, I appealed to the High Court and lost again. I further appealed to the Court of Appeal. If the above provision came to my notice at the Court of Appeal, I can successfully raise the issue of jurisdiction at the court of appeal on the authority of the above provision (Section 28(7)(a)). 

The effect of this is that every business done on the matter right from the Magistrates' Court to the High Court to the Court of Appeal amounts to a nullity and thus goes to no issue. Hence, it has no foundation and so it must crumble into the dust. 

What this means is that you have to start all over, and this time, you have to take your matter to the High Court as the first and appropriate court of law to hear and determine cases bordering on title to land, not to the Magistrates'Court, as wrongly done.

Please check up the meaning of the words in bold in the Mini Law Dictionary.

LL.B COURSES FOR ASPIRING LAW STUDENTS IN THE NIGERIAN UNIVERSITIES

Are you aspiring to become a law graduate or do you wish to have a clue of the courses studied in the law faculties of our Nigerian Universities?

Here is a list of them. You are likely to study all, some or most of the listed courses below, depending on your university of choice.

1. Criminal Law
2. Banking Law
3. Insurance Law
4. Evidence law
5. Property Law
6. Conveyancing Law
7. Tort Law
8. Law of Contract
9. Constitutional Law
10. Company Law
11.  Arbitration Law
12. Law of Taxation
13. Intellectual Property Law
14. Labour Law
15. Copyright Law
16. Family Law
17. International Law
18. Industrial Law
19. Advocacy Law
20. Civil Law
21. Legal System
22. Legal Method
23. Land Law
24. Oil and Gas Law
25. Jurisprudence

Like I said earlier, it all depends on your university of choice. These are courses for the five years duration of your LL.B. Some universities may offer more or less of the listed courses above. 

Also, I welcome additional courses from anyone if a particular law course offered by your university is not listed above. Your contribution is highly appreciated.

 

COURTS- THE HIERARCHY OF COURTS IN NIGERIA

There are various courts in Nigeria. Each court is different from the other depending on its jurisdiction. Despite the jurisdictional identity of a court, a court is also differentiated from another based on its position in the hierarchical pyramid of courts. What then is "hierarchy of courts?" Hierarchy of courts simply means arrangement/categorization of courts in the order of superiority. Hierarchy of courts also helps us appreciate which court an appeal against the decision of a particular court can be made to. 

Using a tenancy matter between Mr. A and Mr. X as case study-  Mr. A is the landlord while Mr  X is the Tenant. Mr. A has satisfied all stipulated statutory requirements for the recovery of  possession of his premises from Mr. X but the latter is unwilling to vacate the said premises. Mr. A wants to take the matter to court in order to legally recover possession from Mr. X. The question is, which court can Mr. A commence/institute the matter. 

If Mr. A takes the matter to the Supreme Court for the first time, the Supreme Court will strike out Mr. A suit on ground that the honourable court lacks the jurisdiction to hear same. Why is this so? It is because Mr. A fails to appreciate the legal effect of the hierarchy of courts. Thus, Mr. A has to put into consideration the appropriate court in the hierarchy he ought to institute/commence the suit. 

Below is the hierarchical list of courts in Nigeria, (in the order of the highest to the lowest).

1. The Supreme Court

2. The Court of Appeal

3. The High Court: High Court of a State, High Court of the FCT, The Federal High Court, The National Industrial Court, The Sharia Court of Appeal, The Customary Court of Appeal, Court Martial, The Tribunals.

4. The Magistrates' Court and the District Court

5. The Area/Sharia Court and the Customary Court

 The effect of this is that, an appeal from the Magistrates' Court (for instance), can only lie to the High Court. In other words, if a Magistrates' court gives judgment on your matter and you wish to appeal against the said judgment, the right/appropriate court to hear your appeal is the High Court, not the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court. Why? Because the High Court is the next court in the order of superiority immediately after the Magistrates' court. Likewise, any appeal from the High Court lies directly to the Court of Appeal, not the Supreme Court or the Magistrate Court.

I do hope this is helpful, please do not hesitate to ask questions is you have any. In as much as I tried to use less legal terms, there are still some legal words you might like to check out their meanings,  please go to my mini law dictionary.

Suggestions and contributions are welcome.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Seek professional advice for  your specific circumstances.