Can an Act of the National Assembly Revoke a State High Court’s Jurisdiction Under the 1999 Constitution?

CASE TITLE: MADUAKOR v. U.B.A. STOCKBROKERS LTD (2023) LPELR-60802(CA)
JUDGMENT DATE: 31ST JULY, 2023
PRACTICE AREA: COURT (JURISDICTION)
LEAD JUDGMENT: PETER OYINKENIMIEMI AFFEN, J.C.A.

SUMMARY OF JUDGMENT:

INTRODUCTION:

This appeal borders on Jurisdiction of the State High Court vis-à-vis the Jurisdiction of the Investment and Securities Tribunal.

FACTS:

This appeal is against the decision of the High Court of Anambra State, Nnewi.

The action revolved around a simple loan contract for the purchase of shares that went awry. The Appellant entered into a shares plus loan contract with the Respondent for the purchase of 2.5m units of First Bank of Nigeria Plc shares during the public offer of 2007 at N33 per share. The Appellant made a 40% equity contribution of N33m, and the balance was to be provided by the Respondent, which allegedly purchased only 250,000 units of shares, amounting to N8.250m from the Appellant’s equity contribution, leaving a balance of N24,750,000, which was withheld, and equally failed or neglected to deliver the Appellant any certificate for the 2,500 shares purchased.

Appellant claimed delivery up of the Share Certificate of the 2,500 units of First Bank of Nigeria Plc shares purchased by the Respondent on behalf of the Appellant, refund of the balance of the Appellant’s equity contribution that was not applied towards purchasing any shares, and damages for withholding the certificate and the balance of the equity contribution.

The Respondent joined issues with the Appellant by filing a statement of defence and subsequently raised a preliminary objection, praying the Court to strike out the suit for want of jurisdiction on the grounds that:

“1. The subject matter of this suit which borders wholly on a dispute between a capital market operator to wit the defendant and its client to wit the plaintiff in respect of the purchase of shares, is wholly within the jurisdiction of the Investment and Securities Tribunal as set out in Section 284 (1) of the Investments and Securities Act 2007.

2. This Honourable Court lacks the competence to hear and determine the claim of the Plaintiff which claim borders on a dispute between a capital market operator and its client”.

The Appellant resisted the objection by contending that the unlimited jurisdiction conferred on the High Court of Anambra State can only be constricted by the Constitution itself, not by an Act of the National Assembly such as the Investment and Securities Act 2007.

The Court, Coram: Chukwudi C. Okaa, J., upheld the preliminary objection. Appellant appealed.

ISSUES FOR Decision:
The Court determined the appeal on a lone issue viz:

“Whether the lower Court was right when it declined jurisdiction to hear and determine the plaintiff’s suit (Appellant herein) on the basis that its jurisdiction is ousted by virtue of Section 284(1) of the Investments and Securities Act 2007″

DECISION/HELD:
The appeal was allowed and the matter was restored back to the cause list of the trial Court, to be reassigned by the Chief Judge for hearing on the merit.

RATIO(S):
• COURT – JURISDICTION – Importance of jurisdiction and effect of proceedings conducted where Court lacks jurisdiction
• PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – ISSUE OF JURISDICTION – When and how to raise the issue of jurisdiction
• COURT – JURISDICTION – What determines jurisdiction of Court to entertain a cause/matter
• COURT – DUTY OF COURT – Duty of Court to ensure it has jurisdiction in a matter
• TRIBUNAL – INVESTMENTS AND SECURITIES TRIBUNAL – Exclusive jurisdiction of the Investments and Securities Tribunal over disputes bordering on capital market operations and investments
• JURISDICTION – JURISDICTION OF THE STATE HIGH COURT – Restrictions placed on the unlimited jurisdiction conferred by the Constitution on the High Court
• JURISDICTION – OUSTER OF JURISDICTION – Whether the exclusive jurisdiction of the Investment and Securities Tribunal under S. 284(1)(a) of the Investment and Securities Act can oust the jurisdiction of the State High Court in the light of constitutional provisions
• TRIBUNAL – INVESTMENTS AND SECURITIES TRIBUNAL – Extent of the jurisdiction of the Investment and Securities Tribunal
• JURISDICTION – JURISDICTION OF THE STATE HIGH COURT – Whether any Statute/Act of the National Assembly can oust/reduce the jurisdiction of the State High Court

To read the full judgment or similar judgments, subscribe to Prime or Primsol