Proper Court with Jurisdiction where an Element of an Offence Is Started, Continued, or Concluded in Two Different States

CASE TITLE: MODE v. SULEIMAN (2024) LPELR-63098(CA)
JUDGMENT DATE: 13TH DECEMBER, 2024
PRACTICE AREA: CIVIL PROCEDURE
LEAD JUDGMENT: UGOCHUKWU ANTHONY OGAKWU, J.C.A.

SUMMARY OF JUDGMENT:

INTRODUCTION:

This appeal borders on civil procedure.

FACTS:

This appeal is against the judgment of the High Court of Zamfara State sitting in its appellate jurisdiction delivered on January 23, 2024.

The provenance of this matter is the direct criminal complaint of criminal breach of trust brought by the respondent against the appellant before the Upper Sharia Court III, Gusau, Zamfara State. The respondent’s complaint was predicated on the transaction he had with the appellant in respect of 760 sacks of maize, which were entrusted to the appellant and taken from Gusau to Kano for sale. When the appellant was not forthcoming with the proceeds of the sale, the respondent brought the complaint to also recover his money.

When the matter came up before the trial Upper Sharia Court, Gusau, the learned counsel for the appellant raised an objection on the territorial jurisdiction of the Court to entertain the complaint on the ground that no part of the offence complained about was committed within the jurisdiction of the Court. After the trial, the Upper Area Court adjourned to rule on the objection. The parties opted to pursue an amicable resolution of the matter, and a settlement was reached, which the parties communicated to the Court with the appellant accepting that he owed the respondent and undertaking to pay in installments. The appellant failed to keep his undertaking, and his learned counsel then walked back on the settlement by stating that the appellant did not undertake to pay the respondent in installments. He urged the trial Upper Sharia Court to rule on the objection raised on its jurisdiction to entertain the complaint.

In its ruling, the trial Upper Sharia Court upheld the efficacy of the settlement reached by the parties and it ordered the appellant to abide by the terms of the settlement, which did not contradict the Islamic Sharia. The Court duly informed the parties of their right to appeal against the decision. There was no appeal against the decision within the time to appeal. After the effluxion of the time to appeal, the appellant filed an application before the High Court of Zamfara State seeking leave for an extension of time to appeal.

The respondent opposed the application and the High Court after considering the application dismissed the same in a considered ruling. 

The appellant was dissatisfied with the decision of the High Court, and, with the leave of the High Court, he appealed against the same.

ISSUE(S) FOR DETERMINATION:

The Court adopted the lone issue formulated by the appellant in the determination of the appeal, thus:

“Whether from the facts and circumstances of this case and, in particular, the grounds of appeal placed before the Court below, the Court below exercised its discretion judicially and judiciously in refusing the appellant’s application.”

DECISION/HELD:

In conclusion, the Court dismissed the appeal.

RATIOS:         

• APPEAL- INTERFERENCE WITH THE EXERCISE OF DISCRETION: Principles of law on interference with exercise of discretion of Court
• APPEAL- EXTENSION/ENLARGEMENT OF TIME TO APPEAL: Position of the law on raising issue of jurisdiction as a proposed ground of appeal in an application for extension of time to appeal
• APPEAL- EXTENSION/ENLARGEMENT OF TIME TO APPEAL: What an applicant must show in an application for enlargement of time
• APPEAL- EXTENSION/ENLARGEMENT OF TIME TO APPEAL: Duty of an applicant in an application for extension of time to appeal
• COURT- NATIVE/CUSTOMARY COURT: Whether technical rules of procedure is applicable in Native/Customary Courts
• JURISDICTION- TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION: Proper Court with jurisdiction where an element of an offence is started, continued or concluded in two different States

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