AMINU MUSA OYEBANJI V. THE STATE
April 30, 2025CHARLES ODEDO V PEOPLES DEMOCRATIC PARTY & ORS
April 30, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (2015-06) Legalpedia (SC) 10101
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria
Fri Jun 5, 2015
Suit Number: SC. 316/2010
CORAM
KUDIRAT MOTONMORI OLATOKUNBO KEKERE-EKUN JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
KUDIRAT MOTONMORI OLATOKUNBO KEKERE-EKUN JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
KUDIRAT MOTONMORI OLATOKUNBO KEKERE-EKUN JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
SUN INSURANCE NIGERIA PLC APPELLANTS
UMEZ ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LIMITED
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The Plaintiff/Respondent at the High Court of Imo State instituted an action against the Defendant/Appellant claiming the sum of Six Million Naira only (?6,000,000.00) being the insured value of his vehicle less 5% and general damages for negligence. The Plaintiff/Respondent claimed his car a Toyota Land Cruiser Prado Jeep which he insured with the Defendant/Appellant was stolen by armed men and the Defendant/Appellant refused to indemnify him of the loss. At the trial Court, the Defendant/Appellant filed his memorandum of appearance but failed to file a Statement of Defence. The Plaintiff/Respondent then applied to the Court for judgment. After been served with the Plaintiff/Respondent’s application for judgment, the Defendant/Appellant consequently came up with a Notice of Preliminary Objection challenging the jurisdiction of the Court to entertain the matter. The trial Court after considering the objection of the Defendant/Appellant dismissed the objection. Dissatisfied with the trial court’s decision, the Defendant/Appellant appealed to the Port-Harcourt Division of the Court of Appeal, where the decision of the trial Court was affirmed. Further aggrieved, the Defendant/Appellant has appealed to this Court.
HELD
Appeal Dismissed
ISSUES
1. Whether having regard to the provisions of sections 251(1)(a)-(s) and 272(1) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended) and Sections 73 and,97 of the Insurance Act No. 2 of 1997, the Court below was right in the majority judgment that the High Court of Justice of Imo State was vestedwith jurisdiction to hear and determine the Plaintiffs/Respondent’s claim arising from a simple contract of insurance?
RATIONES DECIDENDI
“COURT” – MEANING OF “COURT” UNDER SECTION 97 OF THE INSURANCE ACT
“In fact Section 97 is an interpretation section. It defines the word “Court” used in the Act to mean “Federal High Court.”PER S. GALADIMA, J.S.C
JURISDICTION OF COURT – TO CONFER EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION ON A COURT, THE RELEVANT LAW MUST EXPRESSLY PROVIDE FOR SUCH.
“Where it is intended to confer exclusive jurisdiction on a court, the relevant law must expressly provide for it, An example of such express provision is to be found in the Supreme Court (Additional Original Jurisdiction) Act Cap. 16 LFN 2004, which specifically expanded the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. The National Assembly has not enacted any law to expand the exclusive jurisdiction of the Federal High Court beyond what is prescribed in Section 251 (1) (a) – (r) of the Constitution.”PER K.M.O KEKERE-EKUN, J.S.C
JURISDICTION OF THE FEDERAL HIGH COURT – SECTION 251(1) (S) of the CONSTITUTION EMPOWERS THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY TO EXTEND THE JURISDICTION OF THE FEDERAL HIGH COURT
“There is no doubt that by Section 251(1) (s) of the Constitution, the jurisdiction of the Federal High court as enumerated in subparagraphs (a) – (r) may be extended by an Act of the National Assembly.”PER K. M.O KEKERE-EKUN, J.S.C
JURISDICTION OF THE FEDERAL HIGH COURT- THE JURISDICTION CONFERRED ON THE FEDERAL HIGH COURT BY SECTION 80 OF THE INSURANCE ACT NO. 2 OF 1997 IS IN RESPECT OF CRIMINAL OFFENCES COMMITTED UNDER THE ACT
“It is quite clear that the jurisdiction conferred on the Federal High Court by section 80 of the Insurance Act No. 2 of 1997 is in respect of the trial of all Criminal offences committed under the Act. No civil jurisdiction at all has been conferred by the Act on the Federal High Court. The statute is quite plain therefore that it does not confer any exclusive or any jurisdiction at all for that matter on the Federal High to entertain and determine simple claims arising from contract of Insurance between the Parties to that contract.”PER M. MOHAMMED, C. J.N.
POWER OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY- POWER OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY TO MAKE LAWS RELATING TO INSURANCE
“By the combined effect of Section 4 (1) and (2) and Paragraph 33 of the and schedule part 1 of the Constitution, the National Assembly is empowered to make laws relating to insurance.”PER K. M.O KEKERE-EKUN, J.S.C
JURISDICTION OF THE FEDERAL HIGH COURT- SECTION 251(1)(A)-(S) OF THE 1999 CONSTITUTION OF THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA DOES NOT VEST EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION ON THE FEDERAL HIGH COURT IN CONTRACT OF INSURANCE
“Close examination of section 251(i)(a)-(s) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended), does not show any where that jurisdiction to entertain a claim based on simple contract of insurance was vested exclusively on the Federal High Court as claimed by the Appellant.”PER. M. MOHAMMED, C.J.N.
INTERPRETATION OF STATUTE – IMPROPRIETY OF IMPORTING INTO A SECTION OF THE LAW THAT WHICH IS NOT INTENDED TO BE A PART THEREOF
“It is not part of the law to import into the section, a speculation which is not intended to be a part thereof. See the case of Adelekan Vs. Ecu-line N. V. (2005) 12 NWLR (Pt. 993) 33 at 52.”PER. C. B. OGUNBIYI, J.S.C
JURISDICTION OF COURT – THE ISSUE OF JURISDICTION IS FUNDAMENTAL AND SHOULD BE DETERMINED FIRST BEFORE EMBARKING ON THE MERIT OF THE PROCEEDING
‘‘The law is also well settled that the question of jurisdiction is so fundamental that the adjudicating Court should determine the issue first before embarking on any proceedings for hearing on the merit. See Katto Vs. Central Bank of Nigeria (1991) 9 NWLR (Pt.214) 126.’’ PER M. MOHAMMED, C. J.N.
JURISDICTION – JURISDICTION SHOULD BE DETERMINED FIRST AND AT THE EARLIEST OPPORTUNITY
“Jurisdiction which is the authority a court has to decide matters that are litigated before it is very crucial in the process of adjudication. As it is very fundamental, it should be determined first and at the earliest opportunity.” PER J. A. FABIYI, J.S.C
EXERCISE OF JURISDICTION – INGREDIENTS FOR EXERCISE OF JURISDICTION
“The law is trite that one of the ingredients for the exercise of jurisdiction by a Court includes the requirement that the subject matter of the case is within the jurisdiction of the Court and that there is no feature in the case which prevents the Court from exercising its jurisdiction. See Madukolu &Ors Vs Nkemdelim &Ors (1962) 1 All NLR 587 at 594 and Skenconsult (Nig.) Ltd Vs Secondy Ukey(1981) I SC.6” PER. M. MOHAMMED, C. J.N.
APPLICATION OF THE LAW- THE APPLICABLE LAW IN A MATTER IS THE LAW IN FORCE AT THE TIME THE CAUSE OF ACTION AROSE
“The applicable law in respect of a cause or matter is the law in force at the time the cause of action arose. See: UwaifoVs A.G. Bendel State (1982) 7 SC (Reprint) 58; A.G. Lagos State V Dosunmu (1989) 3 NWLR (Pt.111) 552; Utih V Onoyivwe (1991) 1 NWLR (Pt.166) 166.” PER K. M.O KEKERE-EKUN, J.S.C
JURISDICTION – JURISDICTION OF THE STATE HIGH COURT TO ENTERTAIN CONTRACT OF INSURANCE
“It is significant to note that nowhere in Section 251 (1) (a) – (r) is insurance mentioned. In other words, on the face of it there is nothing in those provisions that prevents a state High Court from exercising jurisdiction in respect of contracts of insurance or insurance related matters.”PER K. M.O KEKERE-EKUN, J.S.C
DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION OF COURT- DUTY OF THE COURT IN DETERMINING THE JURISDICTION OF COURT
“It is settled that in the determination of jurisdiction of a court what the court is enjoined to look closely at are the Writ of Summons and the statement of claim of the plaintiff where the action is commenced by a writ of summons, or where it is commenced by Originating Summons, the Summons and the affidavit filed in support of the Summons. See Adeyemi .V. Opeyori 7976, 9 – 10 SC. 372, APGA v. Anyanwu (2014) 2 SC(pt.1) 1.” PER. S. GALADIMA, J.S.C
LACK OF JURISDICTION – EFFECT OF LACK OF JURISDICTION – A DEFECT IN COMPETENCE IS NOT ONLY INTRINSIC BUT ALSO EXTRINSIC TO THE ENTIRE PROCESS OF ADJUDICATION.
“If a court has no jurisdiction to hear and determine a case, the proceedings remain a nullity abinitio no matter how well conducted and decided. A defect in competence is not only intrinsic but also extrinsic to the entire process of adjudication. See: Madukolu v. Nkemdilim (1962) 2 SCNLR 341; Oloba v. Akereja (1958)3 NWLR (Pt. 84) 508.” PER J. A. FABIYI, J.S.C
JURISDICTION OF THE FEDERAL HIGH COURT- A SIMPLE INSURANCE CONTRACT MATTER DOES NOT FALL WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF THE FEDERAL HIGH COURT.
“In short, it is clear that a simple insurance contract matter does not fall within the jurisdiction of the Federal High Court. It is not expressly imbued with jurisdiction to entertain such a matter.”PER J. A. FABIYI, J.S.C
DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION- THE JURISDICTION OF A COURT IS DETERMINED BY THE PLAINTIFF’S CLAIM AS ENDORSED IN THE WRIT OF SUMMONS AND STATEMENT OF CLAIM
“The Law is indeed well settled as correctly argued by the learned Counsel to the Parties in their respective briefs of argument that jurisdiction of a trial Court is determined by the Plaintiffs claim as endorsed in the writ of summons and the statement of claim. See Adeyemi Vs Opeyori(1976) 9-10 SC.31; Mustapha Vs Gov. of Lagos State (1987) 2 NWLR (Pt.58) 539; Tukur Vs Government Of Gongola State (1989) 4 NWWL (Pt.117) 592 and O.H.M.B. VS Garba (2002) 14 NWLR (Pt.788)538.” PER. M. MOHAMMED, C.J.N.
JURISDICTION OF THE FEDERAL HIGH COURT – NATURE OF MATTERS UNDER THE INSURANCE ACT THAT THE FEDERAL HIGH COURT HAS JURISDICTION OVER
“Under the Insurance Act, Sections 30, 32 and 73 provide for the jurisdiction of the Federal High court in some matters i.e. sanction of the court required for the amalgamation of certain types of insurers; petition for winding up; civil proceedings in respect of a claim relating to the death of or bodily injury to any person caused by or arising from the use of a motor vehicle covered by a policy of insurance. None of these provisions is applicable in the present case. Throughout the Act, there is no provision conferring exclusive jurisdiction on the Federal High Court in Insurance matters.” PER K.M.O KEKERE-EKUN, J.S.C
CASES CITED
STATUTES REFERRED TO
Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria1999 (as amended)Insurance Act No. 2 of 1997(Cap. 117) Laws of the Federation of Nigeria (LFN) 2004)Supreme Court (Additional Original Jurisdiction) Act Cap. 16 LFN 2004
