Importance Of Territorial Jurisdiction Of Trial Court

Theobros Auto-link nig. Ltd

V.

Bakely International Auto Engineering Co.

Practice and procedure – Undefended list procedure –

Defendant therein – Duty on.

Issues :

Whether the trial high court had jurisdiction to entertain the suit.

2.Whether the trial court was right in placing the suit under the undefended list procedure.

3.Whether the trial court had jurisdiction to award interest on the judgment sum.

Facts:

The appellant and the respondent entered into a contract for respondent to supply the appellant with motor spare parts. The respondent had her head office in Uyo while the appellant had his lead office in Aba. The contract was concluded, executed and performed in Uyo,Akwa Ibom State respondent supplied the spare parts at a cost of N l.2m.

The appellant’s cheque payment to the respondent was returned unpaid for lack of funds. The respondent was also surcharged the sum of N21O by his banker; UBA.

After several entreaties, the appellant paid instalmentally a total of N550,000 and refused to pay any further sum on the ground that the spare parts were inferior.

Aggrieved, the respondent filed an action against him under the undefended list procedure at the Akwa Ibom State High Court, Uyo.

Though the appellant filed a notice of intention to defend together with its affidavit, the trial court ruled that it did not disclose any defence on the merit. The court therefore set a date for hearing of the matter as indefended.

In its judgment delivered on 5th July 2006, the trial court entered judgment in favour of the respondent in the sum of N650,000 being the balance payment for the spare parts. The court also awarded interest on the judgment sum is at the rate of (5% per annum from the date of judgment until the judgment sum is fully liquidated. The

court also awarded the cost of Nl0,000 in favour of the respondent against the appellant.

The appellant was aggrieved by the judgment and therefore appealed to the Court of Appeal.

At the Court of Appeal, the appellant contended inter alia that since the contract was concluded in Aba,Abia State, the action ought to have been filed in Abia State and not Akwa Ibom State.

It also contended that since there was a conflict in the affidavits of the parties, the matter should have been transferred to the general cause list. This was inspite of its admission of the indebtedness to the respondent.

Held (Unanimously dismissing the appeal)

1.On Fundamental nature of issue of jurisdiction and effect where court lacks jurisdiction –

The question of jurisdiction is very fundamental that it should be dealt with first before continuing

with any proceedings. If a court proceeds without jurisdiction, the proceedings would amount to a

nullity. (P. 350, paras. E-F)

2.On When issue of jurisdiction can be raised –

The question of jurisdiction can be raised at anytime even for the first time on appeal. [Ukwu v. Bunge (1997) 8 NWLR (Pt. 518) 527; Jeric (Mg.)

Ltd. v. UBN Plc. (2000)15 NWLR (Pt. 691) 447; AG, Lagos State v. Dosumu (1989) 3 NWLR (Pt. 111) 552;

Nnonye v. Anyichie (2005) 2 NWLR (pt. 901) 623 referred to] ( P. 350, paras. F-G)

3.On Importance of territorial jurisdiction of a trial court –

Territorial jurisdiction of a trial court is relevant for the validity of any proceedings before a court [Wuyep v. Wuyep (1997) 10 NWLR (Pt. 523) 154 referred to] (P. 350, para. G.)

4.On Determination of jurisdiction of court –

In considering whether a court has jurisdiction to entertain a matter, the court is guided by the claim before it, by critically looking at the writ of summons and the statement of claim [Gafar v. Govt; Kwara State (2007) 4 NWLR (Pt. 1024) 375; Onuorah v. KRPC (2005) 6 NWLR (pt. 921) 393; Tukur v. Govt; Gongola State (1989) 4 NWLR (Pt. 117) 517 referred to] (Pp. 350-35J, paras. G-A)

5.On Venue for commencement of action for breach of contract –

By the provision of order 10 rule 3, Akwa Ibom State High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 1989, suits arising from breach of contract shall be commenced and determined in the judicial Division in which the contract was entered into or ought to have been performed or in which the defendant resides or carries on business. (P. 352, paras. B-C) Per.NDUKWE  ANYANWU, J.C.A. at page 352, paras C-E

“In the instant case, the respondent stated that, the contract of sale of the Mack Clutch was entered into in Uyo Akwa Ibom State. The defendant took delivery of the spare parts and took it to Aba. The appellant asked that the respondent should send one of his employee with him to Aba to collect the money.

With the foregoing, no one is in doubt where the transaction took place. If the contract was entered into in Uyo by the appellant and’ respondent, it therefore means that Akwa Ibom State High Court had jurisdiction to hear and determine this liquidated money demand.”

6.On When undefended List procedure is adopted-

The undefended list procedure is adopted when it is perceived that the defendant could not possibly have any defence to the claim. (P. 353, para. B)

7.On When undefended list procedure is adopted –

A suit is maintainable under the undefended list procedure if it relates to a claim for a debt or liquidated money demand. (P. 353, para. B)

8. On Effect of the undefended list procedure –

The undefended list procedure when adopted shortens the hearing of the suit. [SBN PLc. v. Kyentu (1998) 2 NWLR (Pt. 536) 41; Garba v. Sheba Int. (Nig.) Ltd. (2002) 1 NWLR (pt. 748) 372; Haido v. Usman (2004) 3 NWLR (Pt. 859) 65 referred to] (P. 353, paras. B-C)

9. On Duty on defendant under the undefended list procedure –

A defendant who intends to defend an action brought under the undefended list procedure, must file a notice of his intention to defend the suit with an affidavit disclosing a defence on the merit. After this, it is left for the trial court to determine whether the defendant’s affidavit discloses a defence or not. [Haido v. Usman (2004) 3 NWLR (Pt. 859) 65 referred to] (P. 353, paras. C-D) 10.  On When matter under the undefended List procedure will be transferred to the generaL cause List – Where the court holds that a defendant has a defence, under the undefended list procedure, the suit is transferred to the general cause list. [Ebong [21 [2013] 2 NWLR

Theobros Auto-link Ltd v. B. I. A. E. Co. Ltd          343 v. Ikpe (2002) 17 NWLR (Pt. 797) 504 referred to] (P.353,paras.D-E)

11. On Effect where defendant under the undefended list procedure fails to disclose a defence on the merit

Where the defendant, under the undefended list fails to disclose a defence on the merit, the trial court will set the suit down for hearing. On the return for hearing, the trial court would then proceed to enter judgment without calling on the defendant even if present in court, to answer or be heard. [Haido v. Usman (2004) 3 NWLR (Pt. 859) 65 referred to] (P .. 353, paras. E-F)

12.On Effect where a defendant under the undefended list procedure has no defence on the merits –

A defendant who is indebted to a plaintiff and has no defence on the merit would be stopped from delaying to pay his indebtedness. In the instant case, the appellant had no defence on the merit and was not allowed to continue in his indebtedness. The trial court was therefore right in placing the suit under the undefended list procedure. [Okoli v. Morecab Finance (Nig.) Ltd. (2007) 14 NWLR (Pt. 1053) 37 referred to] (Pp. 353, para. H; 354, para. C)

13.       On Condition precedent to trial under the undefended list procedure-

In exercising its discretion whether to place a suit under the underfended list procedure, a court must make a definite finding that the defendant has not disclosed a defence on the merit. This is a condition precedent to the validity of any trial under the undefended list procedure. In the instant case, the trial court made a specific finding that the appellant had no defence to the claim of the respondent. Equally, the appellant did not deny that he was indebted to the respondent for a balance of N650,000 [Kabiru v. Ibrahim (2004) 2 NWLR (Pt. 857) 326 referred to] (P. 353, paras. F-G).