DR. MONDAY GONI NYIENAKUNA v. UNIVERSITY OF UYO & ORS
(2014) LCN/6985(CA)
RATIO
JURISDICTION: WHETHER THE JURISDICTION OF THE TRIAL COURT CEASES SUBSEQUENT TO THE ENACTMENT OF THE NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL COURT ART
The courts guard their jurisdiction jealously. Where a statute oust the jurisdiction of the court, the language of such statute must be construed rather strictly but once it is crystal clear that an ouster or restriction is intended or imposed and that the facts of a particular case comes squarely within the four corners of the cold embrace of the ouster statute, the hands of the court are tied and has no alternative except to hold that it lacks jurisdiction. Inakoju V. Adeleke (2007) 4 NWLR (pt 1025) 423 SC, Ajayi V. Mil Adm, Ondo State (1997) 5 NWLR (pt. 504) 237 CA, Amadi V. N. N. P. C. (2000) 6 SC (pt. 1) 65 at 95
The Federal High Court had jurisdiction at the onset of this suit, but lost it during its pendency. S.11 (2) makes it mandatory that all matters pending before the commencement of the National Industrial Court Act on 7th of March, 2011 must be concluded within a year. Any matter in the High Court by this date must be concluded by 6th of March, 2012. However, this matter was concluded and judgment delivered on 7th of March, 2013. This is about one year after the Federal High Court lost the necessary vires to continue and conclude with this matter.
Once the court lacks jurisdiction, all proceedings, no matter how well conducted, amounts to a nullity. In the present case, the learned trial Judge continued and concluded without jurisdiction. All what transpired in the Federal High Court sitting in Uyo amounted to a nullity having proceeded without jurisdiction. Madukolu V. Nkemdilim (supra). Per UZO I. NDUKWE-ANYANWU, J.C.A
