DR. EDWIN UNDEMEGBUNAM ONWUDIWE V FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA - Legalpedia | The Complete Lawyer - Research | Productivity | Health

DR. EDWIN UNDEMEGBUNAM ONWUDIWE V FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA

NZE BERNARD CHIGBU VS TONIMAS NIGERIA LIMITED & ANOR
June 6, 2025
DICKSON MOSES V. THE STATE
June 6, 2025
NZE BERNARD CHIGBU VS TONIMAS NIGERIA LIMITED & ANOR
June 6, 2025
DICKSON MOSES V. THE STATE
June 6, 2025
Show all

DR. EDWIN UNDEMEGBUNAM ONWUDIWE V FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA

Legalpedia Citation: (2006) Legalpedia (SC) 11616

In the Supreme Court of Nigeria

Fri Apr 28, 2006

Suit Number: SC. SC. 41/2003

CORAM



PARTIES


DR. EDWIN UNDEMEGBUNAM ONWUDIWE APPELLANTS


RESPONDENTS


AREA(S) OF LAW



SUMMARY OF FACTS

The appellant, the former Chairman of Ivory Merchant Bank Limited,  on behalf of the bank approached one Mrs. Nkechi Justina Nwaogu for a foreign exchange transaction. He collected a bank draft of the sum of N16.56 million which was drawn in favour of the bank and paid same into his personal account.     ?


HELD


The court held that the appellant was guilty of the offences of stealing, obtaining by false pretence and corrupt enrichment.


ISSUES


(1) Whether that the subject matter of the criminal charges was within the jurisdiction of the Failed Banks Tribunal (2)  Whether, the appellant was rightly convicted for the offences of stealing, obtaining by false pretences, corrupt enrichment and obtaining credit by unlawful means on the evidence adduced(3) Whether the Court of Appeal was right in confirming the Order of the Tribunal confiscating the appellant’s assets and properties?


RATIONES DECIDENDI


LACK OF JURISDICTION – EFFECT OF


“There is no doubt that where a court or tribunal has no jurisdiction to adjudicate on a matter the trial and conviction by the tribunal lacking jurisdiction is a nullity no matter how well the trial was conducted.”DAHIRU MUSDAPHER, JSC


ATTITUDE OF APPELLATE COURT TO CONCURRENT FINDINGS OF FACT BY LOWER COURTS


“The Supreme Court may only interfere with the concurrent findings of facts where the circumstances are such the findings of fact are patently erroneous and would amount to a travesty of justice to allow the findings to stand”.. MUSDAPHER, JSC


CASES CITED


1. Ubani V. The State (2003) 18 NWLR (pt.851) 224 at 247, (2003) 12 SCM 310, 2. SOBAK1N V. THE STATE (1981) 3 – 4 SC 31, 3. Kettlewell V. Watson (1882) 21 Ch.D. 685 at 685; R. V. Reigles (1932) 11 NLR 33;


STATUTES REFERRED TO


1. Recovery of Public Property [Special Military Tribunals] Act Cap 389 2. Failed Banks [Recovery of Debts and Financial Malpractices in Banks] Decree No. 18 of 1994, 3. The Criminal Code Act.?


CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT

Comments are closed.