Legalpedia Citation: (2015) Legalpedia (CA) 62011

In the Court of Appeal

HOLDEN AT YOLA

Thu Oct 22, 2015

Suit Number: CA/YL/97/2014

CORAM

JUMMAI HANNATU SANKEY      JUSTICE COURT OF APPEAL

SAIDU TANKO HUSAINI    JUSTICE COURT OF APPEAL

BIOBELE ABRAHAM GEORGEWILL    JUSTICE COURT OF APPEAL

PARTIES

ALHAJI JIKA UMARU

APPELLANTS

RESPONDENTS

AREA(S) OF LAW

SUMMARY OF FACTS

This is an appeal against the judgment of the High Court of Taraba State. The Respondent as Plaintiff had instituted a claim before the Gembu Upper Area Court in claiming against the Appellant as Defendant an order of Court directing the Appellant as Defendant to vacate the land in dispute, a grazing land situate at Wazuru in Mayo – Dule Area of Sarduana Local Government Area of Taraba State. The Appellant as Defendant denied the claim and at the conclusion of trial, the Gembu Upper Area Court gave judgment against the Respondent as Plaintiff and thus dismissed his claims against the Appellant as Defendant. The Respondent as Plaintiff was thoroughly aggrieved with the decision of the Gembu Upper Area Court and promptly appealed against the said decision to the High Court of Taraba State, the Court below. The appeal was heard by the Court below and the appeal was allowed and the judgment of the Gembu Upper Area Court was declared a nullity and was thus set aside by the Court below, which nonetheless proceeded to find that the Respondent as Appellant therein being the Plaintiff before the Gembu Upper Area Court, proved his title to the grazing land in dispute. The Appellant as Respondent before the Court below being dissatisfied with the judgment of the Court below had sought and obtained the leave of this Court to appeal against the judgment of the Court below, hence this appeal to this instant Court.

HELD

Appeal allowed

ISSUES

1. Whether there was a competent and or valid appeal before the High Court of Taraba State and if not whether the Respondent’s appeal before the High Court of Taraba State is not liable to be struck out. (Distilled from ground iv of the Amended Notice of Appeal.)
2. Whether the judgment of the High Court of Taraba State declaring title of the disputed land to the Respondent is not a nullity the said judgment having been founded on proceedings declared a nullity by the High Court. (Distilled from ground v of the Amended Notice of Appeal.)

RATIONES DECIDENDI

JURISDICTION – JURISDICTION IS THE LIFE WIRE OF EVERY MATTER

The law has been well settled and it no longer admits of any argument that jurisdiction is the very basis and the life wire of every matter and on which any court tires or hears a case. It is, metaphorically speaking, indeed the life blood of all trials, whether it be at the Court of trial or on appeal, without which all such trials are a nullity and it does not matter how well or meticulous such a trial or proceeding had been conducted or how sound or profound the resultant judgment. It is simply a nullity. See Madukolu V. Nkemdilim (1962) 2 All NLR 581. See also Balogun V. Ohiwhere (2005) All FWLR (Pt. 281) 1724; Onuorah V. Kaduna PRC Ltd. (2005) All FWLR (Pt. 256) 1356; Okereke V. Yar’Adua (2008) All FWLR (Pt. 343) 636; Essien V. Essien (2010) All FWLR (Pt. 523) 1192; Petro Jessica Enterprises Ltd. V. Leventis Technical Co. Ltd. (1992) 5 NWLR (Pt. 244) 693. PER –  BIOBELE ABRAHAM GEORGEWILL JCA

JURISDICTION – WHETHER OR NOT THE ISSUE OF JURISDICTION CAN BE RAISED AT ANY TIME EVEN FOR THE FIRST TIME ON APPEAL

The corollary to the above succinct position of the law is that the issue of jurisdiction, being a threshold issue, can be raised at any stage of the proceeding either by the parties or by the court suo motu. It could even be raised for the first time on appeal as is being done in the instant appeal where the issue of competence of the Respondent’s Notice of Appeal as Appellant before the Court below was not raised before the Court below.  In the light of the all important place jurisdiction occupies in the hearing and determination of every matter placed before the courts, once it is raised, the court is under a bourden duty and indeed an obligation to consider it first and resolve it one way or the other. This is so because without jurisdiction, which is the life wire of any and every judicial process or proceedings, there can be no validity or competence of either the court process or proceeding or the resultant decision of the court. See Western Steel Works Ltd. V. Iron and Steel Workers Union (1986) 2 NSCC (Vol. 17) 786 @ p. 798. PER –  BIOBELE ABRAHAM GEORGEWILL JCA

JURISDICTION – THE EFFECT OF LACK OF JURISDICTION ON THE PROCESSES, PROCEEDINGS AND DECISION OF COURT

It is for the above reasons and many more germane reasons as can be seen in several decided cases as are replete in our law reports that the effect of lack of jurisdiction on the processes or proceedings and or decisions of court is far so great and can be liken to a watchman who watches or the labourer who labours all in vain except the Almighty God watches or builds. Consequently, it would be safe to say that without jurisdiction the labourers, that is the parties and their counsel on the one hand and the Court on the other hand labour in vain. See Attorney General of Lagos State V. Dosunmu (1989) 3 NWLR (Pt. 111) 552. PER – BIOBELE ABRAHAM GEORGEWILL JCA

JURISDICTION – WHAT HAPPENS WHERE THE COURT FINDS OUT IT LACKS JURISDICTION

In law, therefore, where a Court finds that it has no jurisdiction and that the proceedings are a nullity that is where the matter ends and no amount of sentiment or substantial justice or indeed over zealousness can dictate otherwise, since one cannot put something on nothing and expect it to stand. See Macfoy V. UAC Ltd. (Supra) @ p. 160. See also Nwosu V. Imo State Environmental Sanitation Authority (1990) 2 NWLR (Pt. 135) 688; Barclays Bank of Nigeria V. C.B.N (1976) 1 All NLR (Pt. 1) 6; Attorney General of Lagos State V. Dosunmu (Supra) @ p. 552. PER – BIOBELE ABRAHAM GEORGEWILL JCA

NOTICE OF APPEAL – CONSEQUENCE OF AN UNSIGNED NOTICE OF APPEAL

Consequently, the Notice of Appeal before the Court below having not been signed as required by law and the additional ground of appeal having not being properly signed as required by law by any named Appellant or Legal Practitioner, whose name is on the Roll of Legal Practitioners in the Supreme Court, are both incompetent. No more, no less! No amount of grammar or logical deductions can change that fact. It is as immutable as the old laws of Persia which once promulgated and proclaimed cannot be changed. Happily, in Nigeria, these positions of the law can only be changed by the Supreme Court by reason of the apex position it occupies in the Nigerian Judicial hierarchy. See Okarika V. Samuel (Supra) @ p. 23; Aregbesola V. Oyinlola (Supra) @ p. 133; Ogudu V. The State (Supra) @ p. 409; Alawiye V. Ogunsanya (Supra) @ p. 230. Shelim V. Gobang (Supra) @ p. 195; Societe Generale Bank V. Adewunmi (Supra) @ p. 133; Macfoy V. UAC Ltd. (Supra) @ p. 160. PER – BIOBELE ABRAHAM GEORGEWILL JCA

NOTICE OF APPEALS – MEANING OF

The Notice of Appeal, in so far as appeals are concerned, is the originating process and thus must be valid and competent to confer life on an appeal. Consequently, once a notice of appeal is found or turns out to be invalid and incompetent, it is the end of the matter. In law such an appeal commenced by an invalid notice of appeal is itself incompetent. It is incurably bad and thus good for nothing or anything worthwhile the precious time of the court to be considered on the merit. In Okarika V. Samuel (Supra) @ p. 238, the Supreme Court pronounced with finality inter alia thus:

“It is thus the law that an initiating process whether writ of summons, originating summons or a notice of appeal must be valid to confer jurisdiction on a court to adjudicate between parties on a subject matter in dispute between them. Thus a notice of appeal not signed by an appellant or his counsel is invalid as there is no stamp of authority or authentication”

See also Amadi V. Okoli (1977) 7 SC 57. See also Olarenwaju V. BON Ltd. (1994) 3 NWLR (Pt. 364) 622; Odofin v. Agu  ( 1992) 3 NWLR (Pt. 229) 350; Odunze V. Nwosu (2007) 13 NWLR (Pt. 1050) 1; Adewunmi V. Oketade (2010) 3 SCNJ 368. PER – BIOBELE ABRAHAM GEORGEWILL JCA

NOTICE OF APPEAL – THE LEGAL EFFECT OF AN INCOMPETENT NOTICE OF APPEAL AND AN UNSIGNED ADDITIONAL GROUNDS OF APPEAL

However, regrettably in the instant appeal not only was the original notice of appeal of the Respondent as Appellant before the Court below incompetent, even the additional grounds of appealed not signed in either the name of the Respondent as Appellant or his counsel was also incompetent in its own right. A situation that can be liken to double coincidence of incompetency, without any redeeming or redeemable feature. In law, for an additional ground of appeal to be competent, it must necessarily be based on a competent original notice of appeal, being the originating process without which the additional ground of appeal even where properly signed will be rendered incompetent since in law one cannot put something on nothing and expect it to stand. So it is with both the original notice of appeal and the additional grounds of the appeal of the Respondent as Appellant in the appeal before the Court below, both are like a tale told by an idiot full of sound and fury signifying nothing, absolutely nothing worth anything. See Macfoy V. UAC Ltd. (Supra) @ p. 160. PER – BIOBELE ABRAHAM GEORGEWILL JCA

JURISDICTION – EFFECT OF A COURT FINDING OUT THAT IT LACKS JURISDICTION

In law, it is true and as rightly submitted by Appellant’s counsel that once a Court comes to the conclusion that a proceeding is a nullity, it lacks the jurisdiction to proceed to make findings and declaration on the strength of the null proceedings. However, the converse is also true in law, to the effect that once a Court comes to finding that the originating process is invalid, that is the end of the matter. PER – BIOBELE ABRAHAM GEORGEWILL JCA

NOTICE OF APPEAL – A COURT LACKS JURISDICTION TO HEAR AND DETERMINE AN APPEAL ON A MERIT WHERE THERE IS NO VALID NOTICE OF APPEAL

There being no valid notice of appeal before the Court below, it therefore lacked the jurisdiction to have heard and determined that appeal on the merit as it did and against which decision the Appellant being aggrieved has appealed to this Court, and which appeal based on the reasons adduced above in this judgment is pregnant with merit and perforce must succeed. Consequently, the appeal is allowed. PER – BIOBELE ABRAHAM GEORGEWILL JCA

DEFECTIVE ORIGINATING PROCESS – THE POSITION OF THE LAW ON DEFECTIVE ORIGINATING PROCESSES

The issue of a defective originating process is certainly a jurisdictional one, and a fortiori, where the originating process is defective, it goes to the competence of the proceedings and the jurisdiction of the Court to have entertained the Appeal in the first place. Indeed, it renders the entire proceedings at the lower Court null and void ab initio. In effect in the eyes of the law, the Notice of Appeal did not exist, and by the same token, the proceedings at the lower Court did not take place, since what is void is void. Thus, without much ado, I am in entire agreement with my learned lord that the process which gave rise to the decision of the Court below was incompetent. That being the case, this Appeal which arose from the incompetent proceedings of the trial Court, is mutatis mutandis incompetent. The appellate Courts have time and again pronounced on this matter such that it is quite trite, and there is no shortage of authorities on the subject. See: SLB Consortium Ltd V NNPC (2011) 4 SCNJ 211; Okafor V Nweke (2007) 3 SCNJ 185; Okarika V Samuel (2013) 53 NSCQR (Pt. 1) 220 at 238; FBN Plc V Maiwada (2013) 5 NWLR (Pt. 1348) 444; & Adewunmi V Oketade (2010) 3 SCNJ 368. PER – JUMMAI HANNATU SANKEY JCA

JURISDICTION – THE POSITION OF THE LAW WHERE A COURT IS BEREFT OF JURISDICTION

The law is well settled that where a court is bereft of jurisdiction, any proceeding conducted thereon is an exercise in futility and a nullity, since jurisdiction is the live wire and the spinal cord of adjudication. Accordingly, I find that the Court below was robbed of jurisdiction to entertain the earlier Appeal in the first place. Consequently, this effectively knocked out the bottom out of the Appeal before that Court, the process of court initiating the Appeal being grossly and hopelessly defective. This state of affairs therefore robbed the Court below of the requisite jurisdiction to entertain the Appeal which arose from the incurably bad Notice of Appeal. This is so because all the proceedings which thereafter rested on the inchoate Notice of Appeal are deemed not to have taken place in law. The principle of law as stated in the English case of UAC V McFoy (1962) AC 152 @ 160, that one cannot put something on nothing and expect it to stand, instead it will crumple and disintegrate; (i.e. ex nihilo nihil fit), is germane and apposite. . PER – JUMMAI HANNATU SANKEY JCA

SIGNATURE – SIGNIFICANCE OF A PERSON’S SIGNATURE OR MARK ON A LEGAL DOCUMENT OR PROCESS

A person’s signature or mark on a legal document or process signifies an authentication of that document or process as the mark of that person who holds himself out as bound or responsible for the contents of such document or process, the absence of which is that the document is unacceptable. See: Adeferasin Vs. Dayekh (2007) 11 NWLR (Pt. 1044) 89; Tsalibawa Vs. Habiba (1991) 2 NWLR (Pt. 174) 461, 480-481. PER – SAIDU TANKO HUSAINI JCA

CASES CITED

STATUTES REFERRED TO

Court of Appeal Rules 2011

Land Use Act

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT