CORAM

---

MOHAMMED Lawal Garba – Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria

Adamu Jauro – justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria

Moore Aseimo Abraham Adumein – Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria

Obande Festus Ogbuinya – Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria

Abubakar Sadiq Umar – Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria

---

PARTIES

---

NNAMDI OSUJI

APPELLANTS 

---

1. LEGAL PRACTIONERS DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE

2. INCORPORATED TRUSTEES OF NIGERIAN BAR ASSOCIATION

RESPONDENTS 

---

AREA(S) OF LAW

---

LEGAL PRACTITIONERS ACT, JURISDICTION, APPEALS, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE, PROFESSIONAL MISCONDUCT, DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS, CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, COMPETENCE OF APPEALS, NOTICE OF APPEAL, STATUTORY INTERPRETATION, APPELLATE JURISDICTION

 

---

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The Appellant, Nnamdi Osuji, was a legal practitioner called to the Nigerian Bar in 1992 who operated under the name Nnamdi Osuji & Co. (Legal Practitioners) at Festac Town, Lagos State. One Mr. Arisa Chiekweiro filed a petition against the Appellant with the Nigerian Bar Association (2nd Respondent), alleging that he had engaged the Appellant’s services to purchase property for N8,000,000.00, but the Appellant received the money, failed to purchase the property, and refunded only N1,000,000.00.

Following investigation by the Nigerian Bar Association, a prima facie case of professional misconduct was established, and the matter was referred to the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee (1st Respondent) for hearing. After hearing testimony from the Appellant and two witnesses called by the NBA (including the complainant), the Committee found the Appellant liable for infamous conduct contrary to Rule 1 of the Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners and punishable under Section 12(1) of the Legal Practitioners Act.

On January 14, 2021, the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee directed that the Appellant’s name be struck off the Roll of Legal Practitioners and ordered him to repay N7,000,000.00 to the complainant within six months. Dissatisfied with this direction, the Appellant filed a Notice of Appeal directly to the Supreme Court on February 11, 2021 (deemed on March 20, 2024), containing ten grounds of appeal.

The critical jurisdictional issue arose because the Appellant appealed directly to the Supreme Court against the direction of the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee without first appealing to the Appeal Committee of the Body of Benchers as required by Section 11(7) of the Legal Practitioners Act.

 

---

HELD

---

1. The Supreme Court struck out the appeal for being incompetent.

2. The Court held that it lacked jurisdiction to entertain appeals directly from the direction of the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee without the appellant first appealing to the Appeal Committee of the Body of Benchers as mandated by Section 11(7) of the Legal Practitioners Act.

3. The Court found that the Notice of Appeal was fundamentally defective as it challenged the direction of the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee instead of a decision of the Appeal Committee as provided by the Legal Practitioners Act.

4. The Court held that where a statute provides for a means of doing a thing, it must be done in accordance with the express provision of the statute, and failure to exhaust statutory remedies renders an appeal incompetent.

5. All five justices concurred that the appeal was incompetent and must be struck out.

 

---

ISSUES

---

1. Whether the Supreme Court is conferred with jurisdiction to entertain appeals from the direction of the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee?

2. Having regard to the variation and inconsistency in the composition, quorum and sittings of the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee, whether its proceedings and eventual direction dated 14/01/2021 are not a nullity and a breach of the Appellant’s right to fair hearing?

3. Considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, whether the LPDC was not stripped of the requisite jurisdiction to entertain the complaint against the Appellant?

4. Whether in the light of the state of the evidence before the LPDC whether its direction dated 14/01/2021 is/was not perverse and therefore ought to be avoided or set aside by the Honourable Court?

5. Whether having regard to the provisions of Section 12(8) (a), (b) and (c) of the Legal Practitioners Act, Cap L11, Laws of the Federation, 2004, the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee has jurisdiction to order and direct that the name of the Appellant be struck off the Roll of legal practitioners from the day it gave its Direction?

 

---

RATIONES DECIDENDI

---

STATUTORY APPELLATE PROCEDURE – MANDATORY COMPLIANCE

---

“The Appellant can only appeal against the direction of the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee, to the Appeal Committee of the Body of Benchers. The Appellant cannot appeal directly to the Supreme Court against the direction of the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee, without first appealing to the Appeal Committee of the Body of Benchers.” – Per MOHAMMED LAWAL GARBA, J.S.C.

 

---

COURT’S POWER TO RAISE JURISDICTIONAL ISSUES SOU MOTU

---

“This Court, an appellate Court is empowered to raise the issue of jurisdiction suo motu. A point touching on the competence of an appeal, which is a fundamental issue that undoubtedly affects the jurisdiction of the Court to hear and determine a matter is a substantial point of law that can be raised with and dealt with suo motu, even when the Respondent fails/ed to do so.” – Per MOHAMMED LAWAL GARBA, J.S.C.

 

---

JURISDICTION AS THRESHOLD ISSUE

---

“Jurisdiction is a threshold issue which is not only fundamental but considered as the nerve centre and foundation of adjudication. Hence, any decision by a Court that lacks jurisdiction to hear and determine a matter is a nullity, no matter how well conducted and decided.”  – Per MOHAMMED LAWAL GARBA, J.S.C.

 

---

COURTS AS CREATURES OF STATUTE

---

“Jurisdiction must be specifically conferred, the Courts being creatures of the statutes, from which they derive the power and authority to hear matters before them. Where the relevant statute does not confer the requisite jurisdiction on a Court, the Court cannot confer jurisdiction on itself and the parties, cannot either by consent or acquiescence confer the jurisdiction on the Court, that it does not otherwise possess.”  – Per MOHAMMED LAWAL GARBA, J.S.C.

 

---

MANDATORY STATUTORY PROCEDURE

---

“The law is settled that where a statute provides for a means of doing a thing, it must be done in accordance with the express provision of the statute.” – Per MOHAMMED LAWAL GARBA, J.S.C.

 

---

INCOMPETENT APPEAL – LACK OF JURISDICTION

---

“The instant appeal, having been instituted against the direction of the legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee, without first appealing to the Appeal Committee of the Body of Benchers, renders the appeal/Notice of Appeal incompetent and deprives this Court of its jurisdiction to entertain same.”  – Per MOHAMMED LAWAL GARBA, J.S.C.

 

---

EXHAUSTION OF STATUTORY REMEDIES

---

“The word shall as employed in the law denotes obligation or a command and gives no room for discretion. It imposes a duty. A peremptory mandate is enjoined… It is clear to me that the appellant herein cannot appeal direct to this Court against the direction handed out on 22nd February, 2011 by the Disciplinary Committee without first appealing to the Appeal Committee of the Body of Benchers.”  – Per MOHAMMED LAWAL GARBA, J.S.C. (citing Aladejobi v. NBA)

 

---

CONDITION PRECEDENT TO APPELLATE JURISDICTION

---

“Furthermore, it is the law that where a statute prescribes a legal line of action for initiating Court process, all remedies in the statute should be duly followed to the letter… The law provides that the appellant should appeal to the Appeal Committee of the Body of Benchers. He must exhaust all the remedies by filing his appeal at the Appeal Committee from where he may have a lee-way, to imbue this Court with jurisdiction.”  – Per MOHAMMED LAWAL GARBA, J.S.C. (citing Aladejobi v. NBA)

 

---

INCURABLE DEFECT – FAILURE TO FOLLOW STATUTORY PROCEDURE

---

“Perhaps, it should be further stated that the failure of the appellant to file his appeal before the Appeal Committee of the Body of Benchers against the direction of the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee before filing appeal in this Court engenders incompetence which cannot be cured. This is because the condition precedent to confer jurisdiction on this Court has not been fulfilled.” – Per MOHAMMED LAWAL GARBA, J.S.C. (citing Aladejobi v. NBA)

 

---

NOTICE OF APPEAL AS FOUNDATION OF APPEAL

---

“A Notice of Appeal is the foundation and substratum of every appeal. It is the Court process that initiates and sustains an appeal to this Court. Any defect in a Notice of Appeal affects its competence and goes to the root of the jurisdiction of the Court, because an incompetent Notice of Appeal cannot validly invoke a Court’s jurisdiction.” – Per MOHAMMED LAWAL GARBA, J.S.C.

 

---

CONSEQUENCES OF INCOMPETENT NOTICE OF APPEAL

---

“In other words, an incompetent Notice of Appeal means the non-existence of a valid appeal. An incompetent Notice of Appeal deprives an appellate Court of jurisdiction to hear the appeal. This is because, a competent notice of appeal is a condition precedent to a valid exercise of appellate jurisdiction.” – Per MOHAMMED LAWAL GARBA, J.S.C.

 

---

FATE OF INCOMPETENT APPEALS

---

“An incompetent Notice of Appeal suffers only one fate, which is that, it must be struck out.” – Per MOHAMMED LAWAL GARBA, J.S.C.

 

---

STATUTORY PROCEDURE MUST BE FOLLOWED

---

“As a general principle, the law is that a procedure laid down in a statute for doing a thing must be followed – a party should not apply any other method of doing it.” – Per MOORE ASEIMO ABRAHAM ADUMEIN, J.S.C.

 

---

CASES CITED

---

---

STATUTES REFERRED TO

---

– Legal Practitioners Act, Cap L11, Laws of the Federation 2004

– Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended)

– Evidence Act

– Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners

 

---

OTHER CITATIONS

---

---

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT