SOCIETE BIC S.A & ORS VS. CHARZIN INDUSTRIES LTD. Archives - Legalpedia | The Complete Lawyer - Research | Productivity | Health

SOCIETE BIC S.A & ORS VS. CHARZIN INDUSTRIES LTD.

Legalpedia Citation: (2014-02) Legalpedia (SC) 11110

In the Supreme Court of Nigeria

Fri Feb 14, 2014

Suit Number: SC. 79/2005

CORAM



PARTIES


SOCIETE BICS.A.COMPAGNIE DE MOULAGESNIGERIAN BALL POINT PEN INDUSTRIES APPELLANTS


CHARZIN INDUSTRIES LTD.

RESPONDENTS 


AREA(S) OF LAW



SUMMARY OF FACTS

The Plaintiff, now Respondent, claimed against the Defendants, now Appellants the sum of N10, 000,000 (Ten Million Naira) as damages for injury suffered by reason of libel on the Plaintiff’s product published by the Defendants, and a perpetual injunction. The Defendants (now Appellants) filed a motion for an order striking out the suit for lack of jurisdiction. The trial court dismissed the said application, the Defendants/Applicants appealed to the Court of Appeal and the lower court dismissed the appeal. Dissatisfied with the judgment once more, the Appellants appealed to the Supreme Court


HELD


Appeal dismissed


ISSUES


1. Whether the Court below was right in deeming as abandoned prayer 2 in the appellants’ motion?

2. Whether the Court of Appeal was right in holding that the Respondent’s cause of action in this Suit was founded in tort and not trademark and therefore the High Court of Lagos State has the jurisdiction to hear and determine the Suit?

3. Whether from the facts and circumstances of this case the Court of Appeal was right in holding that for purposes of determining jurisdiction, the plaintiffs’ cause of action is defined by reference to only the plaintiff’s statement of claim?

 


RATIONES DECIDENDI


ISSUE FOR DETERMINATION-WHERE NOT RELATED TO GROUNDS OF APPEAL -HOW TREATED


“An issue for determination not related to or based on grounds of appeal is not only incompetent but completely valueless and must be ignored by the appellate Court.” PER NWALI SYLVESTER NGWUTA, JSC


ISSUE OF JURISDICTION-DETERMINATION OF


“In determining the issue of jurisdiction, it is the claim endorsed on the Writ or stated in the Statement of Claim that will be considered, not the facts averred in the Statement of Claim or the affidavit evidence to be relied on by the plaintiff.” PER NWALI SYLVESTER NGWUTA, JSC


CAUSE OF ACTION-DEFINITION OF


“The term “cause of action” is judicially defined as denoting every fact (though not every piece of evidence) which it would be necessary for the plaintiff to prove, if traversed, to support his right to the judgment of the Court. It is any act on the part of the defendant which gives the plaintiff a cause to complain”. PER NWALI SYLVESTER NGWUTA, JSC


JURISDICTION-DUTY OF A JUDGE NOT TO EXPAND JURISDICTION BEYOND THE LIMIT IMPOSED BY LAW


“It is an established fundamental principle that while a Judge can expound his jurisdiction, he cannot expand same beyond the limit imposed by law. A Judge does not hunger after jurisdiction.” PER NWALI SYLVESTER NGWUTA, JSC


CAUSE OF ACTION-NATURE OF


“It is different from the evidence or pieces of evidence necessary to sustain the claim. It is the entire set of circumstances giving right to enforceable claim.” PER NWALI SYLVESTER NGWUTA, JSC


GROUND OF APPEAL-


“A ground of appeal should not be split to raise two issues”. PER NWALI SYLVESTER NGWUTA, JSC


GROUND OF APPEAL-


“It is an established principle of law that the number of grounds of appeal should on no account be less than the issues for determination and framing two issues from one ground of appeal is a violation of the said principle.” PER NWALI SYLVESTER NGWUTA, JSC


JURISDICTION OF COURT-DEFINITION OF


“Jurisdiction of a Court is defined as the dignity which the Court has to do justice in a cause or complaint brought before it. It is the limits imposed upon the power of a validly constituted Court to hear and determine issues with reference to subject matter, the parties and the relief sought.” PER NWALI SYLVESTER NGWUTA, JSC


CASES CITED


Adeyemi v. Opeyori (1976) 9, 10 SC 31Adimora v. Ajufo (1988) 3 NWLR (pt. S0) 1Agu v. lkewibe (1991) 3 NWLR (Pt. 180) 38lkine v. Edierode (2007) 92 LRCN 3288 at 3316Lasisi Fadare & Ors v. A-G Oyo State (1982) 14 SC 1 at 7Odutan v. Akibu (2000) 7 sc (Pt. 11) 106Omo v. JSC Delta State (2000) 7 SC(Pt. 11) p.1


STATUTES REFERRED TO


The Federal High Court Act Cap F.12 Vol. 6 Laws of the Federation of NigeriaThe 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria


CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT