■ Introduction
In any legal system, the concept of jurisdiction is paramount, serving as the bedrock upon which a court's authority and competence rest. Without proper jurisdiction, a court, regardless of its stature—even the highest court in the land—is rendered fundamentally incompetent to hear or determine a matter.
■ Jurisdiction: The Foundation of Court Authority
Jurisdiction refers to the court's power or authority to hear and decide a particular case, or to make orders regarding a specific subject matter. It is a threshold issue that must be established before any substantive proceedings can legitimately occur.
Crucially, the power of a court to entertain a matter is not something that can be conferred or waived by the parties involved. Parties cannot, by their consent or agreement, bestow jurisdiction upon a court that it does not inherently possess. If a court lacks jurisdiction, any proceedings conducted and any judgment rendered by it are a nullity, void from the outset, no matter how well-conducted or apparently just the proceedings may seem.
■ Derivation of Jurisdiction: By Law, Not by Defense
The source of a court's jurisdiction is strictly derived from law or statute. This means that the power to hear specific types of cases, or to adjudicate on particular subject matters, must be expressly granted to that court by the constitution or relevant legislation. The subject matter brought before the court by the plaintiff (claimant) must fall within the ambit of what the law has recognized and assigned as within that court's competence to handle. If the law does not empower the court to hear a particular kind of case, it remains incompetent to do so.
Furthermore, a critical principle is that jurisdiction is primarily determined by the claim of the claimant (plaintiff), as presented in their originating processes (e.g., statement of claim or originating summons). It is not determined by the nature of the defense raised by the defendant. The court first looks at the plaintiff's complaint to ascertain if it falls within its statutory jurisdiction. This ensures clarity and prevents a defendant from attempting to strip a court of its legitimate jurisdiction merely by raising certain defenses.
In summary, jurisdiction is not merely a procedural formality but a constitutional and statutory imperative. It dictates the boundaries of judicial power, ensuring that courts operate within their legally defined remits and that justice is administered by a tribunal that is, at its very core, competent to hear and determine the issues before it.
BELLO V. DAMISA (2017) All FWLR (873) page 1725 at 1749-1750, para G-B.
■ When is a Court Competent?
Before a court is said to be Competent to have jurisdiction in respect of any matter, be it an appeal or case of first instance, it must be satisfied of the existence of the underlisted conditions, namely;
(a) it must be properly constituted with regard to the number and qualification of the members;
(b) The subject matter of the action must be within its jurisdiction
(c) The action or appeal is initiated by due process of law; and
d) any condition precedent to the exercise of its jurisdiction must have been fulfilled or met.
See. Bello (Supra) p. 1746-1747, para G-A
