ACCESS BANK PLC v EVANS EKAINYANG

CORAM

PARTIES

ACCESS BANK PLC APPELLANTS

EVANS EKAINYANG RESPONDENTS

AREA(S) OF LAW

SUMMARY OF FACTS

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The Claimant/Respondent who was a former branch manager of the Defendant’s /Appellant’s Bank instituted an action against the Defendant/ Appellant in the High Court of Akwa Ibom State under the undefended list claiming the sum of N760, 237.50 (Seven Hundred and sixty thousand, two Hundred and Thirty Seven Naira and Fifty Kobo) being pre- merger gratuity that accrued to the Claimant as former staff and Manager of the Ikot Ekpene branch which sum and accrued interest the Defendant/Appellant has refused to pay to the Claimant/Respondent despite repeated demands. The Defendant/Appellant filed a preliminary objection challenging the jurisdiction of the Honourable Court to hear the case. The lower Court delivered its ruling dismissing the Preliminary Objection and entered judgment for the Claimant in the said sum and interest thereon at the rate of 21% until the judgment debt is fully liquidated. .Being dissatisfied with the decision of the trial court, the Defendant/Appellant lodged an appeal to this court.

HELD

Appeal Dismissed

ISSUES

1. “Whether considering the facts and circumstances of this and the provisions of section 254C (1) (a) (k) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 as amended, the High Court of Cross River State is seized with the requisite jurisdiction to entertain and adjudicate upon this suit.?

2. The facts and circumstances of the case as well as the law considered, was the lower Court in breach of the Appellants right of fair hearing when immediately after dismissing the Appellants Preliminary Objection, it proceeded to enter final judgment against the Appellant without giving the Appellant an opportunity to file its defence processes to defend the suit?

RATIONES DECIDENDI

JURISDICTION OF THE NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL COURT – EXTENT OF THE JURISDICTION OF THE NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL COURT

“The jurisdiction of the National Industrial Court covers only disputes arising from payment or non-payment of the items above mentioned which of course applies only to employees, workers, civil or public servants of the erring organization, agency or parastatal concerned.”

UNDEFENDED LIST PROCEEDING -PURPOSE OF THE UNDEFENDED LIST PROCEEDING

“The undefended list proceeding is meant to shorten the hearing of a suit where the claim is for a liquidated sum. It is infact designed to avoid the intricases of pleadings in a normal hearing in our court”.

UNDEFENDED LIST PROCEDURE – AN UNDEFENDED LIST PROCEDURE IS NOT APPROPRIATE IN COMPLEX CASES WITH CONTROVERSIAL TRIABLE ISSUES

“Although the procedure under the undefended list has the advantages of speedy and quick dispensation of justice, it has its own limitation in that it is not an appropriate procedure in complex cases with controversial triable issues”.

UNDEFENDED LIST – NATURE OF A CLAIM UNDER THE UNDEFENDED LIST

“A claim under the undefended list comes in the form of the recovery of debt or liquidated sum of money demanded and that is the position of the Law.”

UNDEFENDED LIST PROCEDURE – UNDEFENDED LIST PROCEDURE IS USUALLY REGULATED BY THE RULES OF COURT

“The undefended list procedure being of a special procedure, it is usually regulated by the rules of the Court under which it is commenced.”

LIQUIDATED SUM – FACTORS THAT DETERMINES LIQUIDATED SUM

“On the other hand, many factors determine when a liquidated sum is applicable viz:
A. The sum must be arithmetically ascertainable without further investigation.
B. If it is in reference to a contract, the parties to the contract must have mutually and unequivocally agreed on fixed amount payable on a breach. ,
C. The argued and fixed sum must be known prior to the breach”.

COMPETENCE OF COURT – DETERMINATION OF THE COMPETENCE OF COURT

“For a Court to be competent to entertain a case the suit must have been initiated by due process of the applicable law, before a panel that is properly constituted and there is no feature in the case which prevents the Court from exercising its jurisdiction. See Madukolum vs. Nkemdilim (2001) 46 WRN and re-stated in Oloba vs. Akoreje (1988) 3 NWLR pt 84 page 508, (1988) 7 SC (pt. 1) 15 (1988) 7 SCNJ (pt.1) page 56.”

JURISDICTION OF COURT – A CHALLENGE TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE COURT CAN BE RAISED AT ANY STAGE OF THE PROCEEDINGS

“A challenge to the jurisdiction of the Court can be raised at any stage of the proceedings and can be taken at any time even for the first time on appeal and or suo moto by the appeal Court. However, where it is the Court that raised it, it will then call upon the parties to address it on same, or where it is discovered that it acted without jurisdiction then without much ado. It will fall back on its inherent jurisdiction to set aside its own decision in the matter. See Sokoto State Government vs. Kamdex Nig Ltd. (2007) 7 NWLR pt 104 page 466 (2007)3 SC (pt. 1) 1.”

LACK OF JURISDICTION – A DEFECT IN COMPETENCE IS NOT ONLY INTRINSIC BUT EXTRINSIC TO THE ENTIRE PROCESS OF ADJUDICATION

“Where a Court lacks jurisdiction, there is want of competence to try the matter. If a Court has no jurisdiction to hear and determine a case, the proceedings remain a nullity ab initio no matter how well conducted and decided. This is because a defect in competence is not only intrinsic but extrinsic to the entire process of adjudication. See Labryi vs. Anretiola (1998) 8 NWLR 358 page 139, Katto vs. CBN (2000) 18 WRN 108 Akegbojo vs. Ataga (1998) 1 NWLR pt. 534 page 459, Ogundipe vs. Akinloye (2002) 10 NWLR pt 755, page 341.”

JURISDICTION OF COURT – HOW DETERMINED

“It is the claim of the Plaintiff that determines the jurisdiction of the Court. See Tukur vs. Governor, Gongola State (1989) 4 NWLR pt 117 page 517. Also jurisdiction of a Court can also be determined by the law that established it. See Ajoinale vs. Yaduat (No. 1) (1991) 5 NWLR pt 191 page 257.”

UNDEFENDED LIST PROCEDURE – PURPOSE OF UNDEFENDED LIST PROCEDURE

“The undefended list procedure is a special kind of procedure provided for the purpose of fast-tracking trial of cases where the claim of the Claimant is a liquidated money demand and meant to avoid witty Defendants from using legal subterfuge or tricks from delaying clear cases of liquidated debts See Denton West vs Muoma (2010) 2 NWLR pt 1177 page 119, UBA Plc vs. Jaragba(2007) 31 NSCQR page 144”.

RULES OF COURT – RULES OF COURT ARE MEANT TO BE OBEYED AND BINDS ALL PARTIES

“It is now firmly established that Rules of Court must be followed strictly unless the Court is given a direction under them. In other word, rules of Court are meant to be obeyed and the said rules bind all parties beforethe Court. See the Hon Justice Kalu Anjah vs. African Newspapers of (Nig) Ltd (1992) 7 SCNJ (Pt.1) page 47 at 48. Ajayi& Anor .vs. Omorogbe (1993) 7 SCNJ (PT. 1) Page 168, Miss Ezeanah vs. Alhaji Atta mamoud (2004) 17 WRN 1 (2004) 7 NWLR pt. 873 page 468 at 502, (2004) 2 SCNJ 200 per Pats Acholonu JSC ( of blessed memory).”

RULES OF COURT – RULES OF COURT PARTAKE OF THE NATURE OF SUBSIDIARY LEGISLATION

“It must be stressed that rules of Court are not mere rules but they partake of the nature of subsidiary legislation by virtue of section 18 (1) of the interpretation Act and therefore, have a force of law. See also Akanbi & Ors vs. Alao & Anor (1989) 5 SCNJ 10 at 13”.

FAIR HEARING – MEANING OF FAIR HEARING

“Fair hearing only means that a party should be given an opportunity to be heard and present his case before the Court. However if a litigant who has all the opportunity in the world to present his case before the Court fails to do so, he cannot be heard when he turns around to complain of breach of his fair hearing. See A. Mohammed vs. Kano N. A (1968) 1 All NLR 424, Bomor vs. Ekiyor (1997) 9 NWLR Pt. 519 Page 1, Otu vs. Udouna(2000) 13 NWLR Pt 683 page 157.”

JURISDICTION OF THE NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL COURT – EXTENT OF THE JURISDICTION OF THE NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL COURT

“The jurisdiction of the National Industrial Court covers only disputes arising from payment or non-payment of the items above mentioned which of course applies only to employees, workers, civil or public servants of the erring organization, agency or parastatal concerned.”

UNDEFENDED LIST PROCEEDING -PURPOSE OF THE UNDEFENDED LIST PROCEEDING

“The undefended list proceeding is meant to shorten the hearing of a suit where the claim is for a liquidated sum. It is infact designed to avoid the intricases of pleadings in a normal hearing in our court”.

UNDEFENDED LIST PROCEDURE – AN UNDEFENDED LIST PROCEDURE IS NOT APPROPRIATE IN COMPLEX CASES WITH CONTROVERSIAL TRIABLE ISSUES

“Although the procedure under the undefended list has the advantages of speedy and quick dispensation of justice, it has its own limitation in that it is not an appropriate procedure in complex cases with controversial triable issues”.

UNDEFENDED LIST – NATURE OF A CLAIM UNDER THE UNDEFENDED LIST

“A claim under the undefended list comes in the form of the recovery of debt or liquidated sum of money demanded and that is the position of the Law.”

UNDEFENDED LIST PROCEDURE – UNDEFENDED LIST PROCEDURE IS USUALLY REGULATED BY THE RULES OF COURT

“The undefended list procedure being of a special procedure, it is usually regulated by the rules of the Court under which it is commenced.”

LIQUIDATED SUM – FACTORS THAT DETERMINES LIQUIDATED SUM

“On the other hand, many factors determine when a liquidated sum is applicable viz:
A. The sum must be arithmetically ascertainable without further investigation.
B. If it is in reference to a contract, the parties to the contract must have mutually and unequivocally agreed on fixed amount payable on a breach. ,
C. The argued and fixed sum must be known prior to the breach”.

COMPETENCE OF COURT – DETERMINATION OF THE COMPETENCE OF COURT

“For a Court to be competent to entertain a case the suit must have been initiated by due process of the applicable law, before a panel that is properly constituted and there is no feature in the case which prevents the Court from exercising its jurisdiction. See Madukolum vs. Nkemdilim (2001) 46 WRN and re-stated in Oloba vs. Akoreje (1988) 3 NWLR pt 84 page 508, (1988) 7 SC (pt. 1) 15 (1988) 7 SCNJ (pt.1) page 56.”

JURISDICTION OF COURT – A CHALLENGE TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE COURT CAN BE RAISED AT ANY STAGE OF THE PROCEEDINGS

“A challenge to the jurisdiction of the Court can be raised at any stage of the proceedings and can be taken at any time even for the first time on appeal and or suo moto by the appeal Court. However, where it is the Court that raised it, it will then call upon the parties to address it on same, or where it is discovered that it acted without jurisdiction then without much ado. It will fall back on its inherent jurisdiction to set aside its own decision in the matter. See Sokoto State Government vs. Kamdex Nig Ltd. (2007) 7 NWLR pt 104 page 466 (2007)3 SC (pt. 1) 1.”

LACK OF JURISDICTION – A DEFECT IN COMPETENCE IS NOT ONLY INTRINSIC BUT EXTRINSIC TO THE ENTIRE PROCESS OF ADJUDICATION

“Where a Court lacks jurisdiction, there is want of competence to try the matter. If a Court has no jurisdiction to hear and determine a case, the proceedings remain a nullity ab initio no matter how well conducted and decided. This is because a defect in competence is not only intrinsic but extrinsic to the entire process of adjudication. See Labryi vs. Anretiola (1998) 8 NWLR 358 page 139, Katto vs. CBN (2000) 18 WRN 108 Akegbojo vs. Ataga (1998) 1 NWLR pt. 534 page 459, Ogundipe vs. Akinloye (2002) 10 NWLR pt 755, page 341.”

JURISDICTION OF COURT – HOW DETERMINED

“It is the claim of the Plaintiff that determines the jurisdiction of the Court. See Tukur vs. Governor, Gongola State (1989) 4 NWLR pt 117 page 517. Also jurisdiction of a Court can also be determined by the law that established it. See Ajoinale vs. Yaduat (No. 1) (1991) 5 NWLR pt 191 page 257.”

UNDEFENDED LIST PROCEDURE – PURPOSE OF UNDEFENDED LIST PROCEDURE

“The undefended list procedure is a special kind of procedure provided for the purpose of fast-tracking trial of cases where the claim of the Claimant is a liquidated money demand and meant to avoid witty Defendants from using legal subterfuge or tricks from delaying clear cases of liquidated debts See Denton West vs Muoma (2010) 2 NWLR pt 1177 page 119, UBA Plc vs. Jaragba(2007) 31 NSCQR page 144”.

RULES OF COURT – RULES OF COURT ARE MEANT TO BE OBEYED AND BINDS ALL PARTIES

“It is now firmly established that Rules of Court must be followed strictly unless the Court is given a direction under them. In other word, rules of Court are meant to be obeyed and the said rules bind all parties beforethe Court. See the Hon Justice Kalu Anjah vs. African Newspapers of (Nig) Ltd (1992) 7 SCNJ (Pt.1) page 47 at 48. Ajayi& Anor .vs. Omorogbe (1993) 7 SCNJ (PT. 1) Page 168, Miss Ezeanah vs. Alhaji Atta mamoud (2004) 17 WRN 1 (2004) 7 NWLR pt. 873 page 468 at 502, (2004) 2 SCNJ 200 per Pats Acholonu JSC ( of blessed memory).”

RULES OF COURT – RULES OF COURT PARTAKE OF THE NATURE OF SUBSIDIARY LEGISLATION

“It must be stressed that rules of Court are not mere rules but they partake of the nature of subsidiary legislation by virtue of section 18 (1) of the interpretation Act and therefore, have a force of law. See also Akanbi & Ors vs. Alao & Anor (1989) 5 SCNJ 10 at 13”.

FAIR HEARING – MEANING OF FAIR HEARING

“Fair hearing only means that a party should be given an opportunity to be heard and present his case before the Court. However if a litigant who has all the opportunity in the world to present his case before the Court fails to do so, he cannot be heard when he turns around to complain of breach of his fair hearing. See A. Mohammed vs. Kano N. A (1968) 1 All NLR 424, Bomor vs. Ekiyor (1997) 9 NWLR Pt. 519 Page 1, Otu vs. Udouna(2000) 13 NWLR Pt 683 page 157.”

CASES CITED

STATUTES REFERRED TO

1. Akwa Ibom State (Civil Procedure) Rules 2009

2. Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 as amended

3. Cross River State (Civil Procedure) Rules 2009

4. National Industrial Court Act

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT