CORAM

---

Adamu Jauro -Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria

Chidi Nwaoma Uwa -Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria

Obande Festus Ogbuinya- Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria

Habeeb Adewale Olumuyiwa Abiru -Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria

Abubakar Sadiq Umar-Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria

---

PARTIES

---

1. SCC NIGERIA LIMITED

2. ABEL OLOKOR

APPELLANTS 

---

1. DAVID GEORGE

2. THE NIGERIAN POLICE

RESPONDENTS 

---

AREA(S) OF LAW

---

---

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The 1st Respondent worked for the 1st Appellant as a labourer from 2003 and was later promoted to generator attendant. On November 30, 2014, while on night duty, he was arrested by the 2nd Appellant (1st Appellant’s Chief Security Officer) on allegations of theft involving two trucks. He was taken to Bwari Police Station and detained from November 30 to December 3, 2014. After his release on bail, his employment was terminated. He filed a fundamental rights enforcement action at the FCT High Court against the Appellants and Nigerian Police (2nd Respondent). The Appellants challenged the jurisdiction of the High Court, arguing the National Industrial Court or Federal High Court should hear the matter. Both the trial court and Court of Appeal affirmed the FCT High Court’s jurisdiction, leading to this appeal.

 

---

HELD

---

1. The appeal was dismissed for lacking merit.

2. The Supreme Court affirmed the concurrent decisions of the lower courts.

3. The Court held that the FCT High Court had jurisdiction as the case was primarily about fundamental rights enforcement, not employment.

4. The Court found that both Federal High Court and State/FCT High Courts have concurrent jurisdiction in fundamental rights cases.

5. Costs of N1,000,000 were awarded against the Appellants in favor of the 1st Respondent.

 

---

ISSUES

---

1. Whether considering the provisions of Sections 254C(1)(d) and 251(1)(p)(q)(r) of the Constitution, the lower court was right to affirm that the trial High Court had jurisdiction over the 1st Respondent’s claim.?

2. Whether the lower court was right in affirming the trial court’s judgment which found the Appellants jointly liable together with the 2nd Respondent for the arrest and detention of the 1st Respondent.?

 

---

RATIONES DECIDENDI

---

DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION

---

 “It is the Plaintiffs claim that determines the jurisdiction of the Court and that a look at the 1st Respondent’s originating motion, supporting statement and affidavit… would reveal that the 1st Respondent’s claim is connected with his employment.” – Per Abubakar Sadiq Umar, JSC

 

---

CONCURRENT JURISDICTION IN FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS CASES

---

“Both the Federal High Court and State/FCT High Courts have concurrent jurisdiction on enforcement of fundamental rights pursuant to Section 46(1) and (2).” – Per Abubakar Sadiq Umar, JSC

 

---

NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL COURT’S JURISDICTION

---

“The kind of fundamental right issues envisaged under Section 254C(1)(d) of the Constitution that could vest exclusive jurisdiction on the National Industrial Court are civil causes and matters such as workplace discrimination, gender inequality, right to form or belong to trade association, right to receive equal pay for work done and others.” – Per Habeeb Adewale Olumuyiwa Abiru, JSC

 

---

EVALUATION OF AFFIDAVIT EVIDENCE

---

“In an action decided upon affidavit evidence such as this case, the affidavit of the parties plays dual roles in the sense that it serves the purpose pleadings do serve in actions commenced by writ of summons and at the same time it is the evidence which the parties rely on to prove their case.” – Per Abubakar Sadiq Umar, JSC

 

---

LIBERAL APPROACH TO FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS ENFORCEMENT

---

“The approach of this Court to enforcement of fundamental right has been a liberal one… irrespective of the subject matter and parties before the Court both Federal High Court and the State/FCT High Courts have concurrent jurisdiction on enforcement of fundamental rights.” – Per Abubakar Sadiq Umar, JSC

 

---

IMPORTANCE OF JURISDICTION

---

“Jurisdiction is the bedrock upon which an action rests for its determination… It is akin to the blood in the vein of a living being; if it dries up it signifies the end of his existence.” – Per Abubakar Sadiq Umar, JSC

 

---

REASONABLE SUSPICION FOR ARREST

---

 “The test for reasonable suspicion is an objective one. It is not a case of a complainant pointing to every Tom, Dick and Harry as the suspects in a crime or the police throwing caution to the winds and begin to make sweeping and indiscriminate arrest of persons.” – Per Abubakar Sadiq Umar, JSC

 

---

JURISDICTION IN FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS CASES

---

“The provision ensures that he has access to any High Court as long as it is within the State in which the alleged infraction has occurred. Indeed, it would negate the principle behind the guarantee of fundamental rights if a citizen were to have any obstacle placed in the path of enforcing those rights.” – Per Adamu Jauro, JSC

 

---

STATUTORY BASIS OF JURISDICTION

---

“A Court of law cannot add to or subtract from the provisions of a statute… the statute is the master and all that a Court of law can do is to interpret the provisions of a statute to obtain or achieve the clear intentions of the lawmaker.” – Per Habeeb Adewale Olumuyiwa Abiru, JSC

 

---

JURISDICTION OF NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL COURT

---

“Its jurisdiction to entertain fundamental right matters is limited to when it arises in relation to employment, labour, industrial relations, trade unionism and employer association matters. Thus, its exclusive jurisdiction is only when a fundamental right matter falls within these areas of its enumerated jurisdiction.” – Per Habeeb Adewale Olumuyiwa Abiru, JSC

 

---

THRESHOLD NATURE OF JURISDICTION

---

 “The importance of the jurisdiction of a Court in the adjudicatory process is well-documented… Jurisdiction is the foundation of adjudication, without which a Court cannot competently entertain any suit or resolve any dispute submitted to it.” – Per Chidi Nwaoma Uwa, JSC

 

---

CONTRADICTIONS IN EVIDENCE

---

“It is elementary law that the evaluation of evidence is the province of the trial Court and unless it is shown that the finding of the trial Court is perverse an appellate Court will not interfere.” – Per Abubakar Sadiq Umar, JSC

 

---

PROTECTION OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS

---

“Fundamental rights of citizens occupy a preeminent place, they stand above any other law of the land and are inalienable rights of citizens. For this reason, they are recognized and guaranteed by no less an enactment than the Constitution itself.” – Per Adamu Jauro, JSC

 

---

CASES CITED

---

---

STATUTES REFERRED TO

---

1. Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended)

2. Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules

3. Evidence Act 2011

4. Court of Appeal Rules 2021

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGEMENT