‘Appeal Court has jurisdiction on National Industrial Court decisions’
(Delivered by Chima Cletus Nweze, JSC)
My Lords, the proximate impulsion to this matter was an order of the Court of Appeal (hereinafter, simply, referred to as “the lower court) contained in its Ruling of November 11, 2014. The said ruling was sequel to a Motion on Notice of September 24, 2014 wherein the appellant implored it (that is, the lower court) to state a case for this court in view of the constitutional issues and substantial points of law which arose before it.
The lower court’s triadic formulations were expressed in these terms:
1) Whether the Court of Appeal as an appellate court created by the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended) has the jurisdiction to the exclusion of any other court of law in Nigeria to hear and determine all appeals arising from the decisions of the National Industrial Court of Nigeria?
2) Whether there exists any constitutional provision which expressly divested the Court of Appeal of its appellate jurisdiction over all decisions on civil matters emanating from the National Industrial Court of Nigeria?
3) Whether the Court of Appeal’s jurisdiction to hear civil appeals from the decisions of the National Industrial Court of Nigeria is limited to only questions of fundamental rights?
Pursuant to the Rules of this Court, counsel for the parties filed and exchanged their briefs of arguments. At the hearing of this matter on April 3, 2017, Dr Charles D. Mekwunye, learned counsel for the appellant, adopted the brief of argument filed on December 11, 2015 and the reply brief filed on December 16, 2.015. On his part, Fes Eze Eke, for the respondent, adopted the brief of argument filed on December 14, 2015.
As a preliminary point, I agree with the observation of counsel for the respondent that “the three questions above appear to be similar and a repetition of one another (paragraph 2.1, page 5 of the respondent’s brief ).
In the exercise of this court’s undoubted prerogative to prune down and, accentuate, issues in the interest of clarity and brevity, I have taken the liberty to isolate the first question as, truly, determinative of the Trinitarian formulations of the lower court, Okoro v The State (1988) 12. SC 191: 1988 12. SCNJ 191; Unity Bank Plc and Anor v Bouarl (2008) LPELR -3411 (SC) 21-22; A-B; Musaconi Ltd
Asphalt (2013) LPELR-20745 (SC) 6-7; I.TI.V. Ltd and Anor V Onyesom Community Bank Ltd (2015) LPELR-24819 (SC); B-D.
I must quickly point out that the said issue is, sufficiently, commodious such that it embraces the other outstanding two issues in its canopied ambience. Accordingly, the only issue that calls for the decisive response of this court is the catholic question couched thus:
Whether the Court of Appeal as an appellate court created by the Constitution of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended) has the jurisdiction to the exclusion of any other court or law in Nigeria to hear and determine all appeals arising from the decisions of the National Industrial Court of Nigeria?
Before dealing with it, however, a restatement of the factual background of the trajectory of this matter to this court would not, in my humble view, be out of place.
Factual Background
At the National Industrial Court, Lagos Division, (throughout this judgement, subsequently, referred to as “the trial court”), the party designated herein as the respondent, on February 2, 2012, took out an action against the, now, extinct bank, namely, AfriBank Nigeria Plc. His claims were, inter alia, for wrongful termination of employment; unpaid accrued salaries and other benefits, allegedly, due to him in the course of his employment in the said bank. Although, the mutations in nomenclature from AfriBank Nigeria Plc to Mainstream Bank Ltd and Skye Bank Plc would not delay us here, it has to be noted that Mainstream Bank, as successor-in-title to AfriBan’r, Nigeria Plc, bore the weight of the forensic contest.
Pleadings were filed and exchanged, as dictated by the Rules of the trial court. Thereafter, precisely, on July 10, 2012, the said bank, that is, Mainstream Bank Ltd, by Notice of Preliminary Objection, entreated the trial court to determine the matter in limine on the ground of want of jurisdiction, as according to tenor of the objection, the action was predicated on employer and employees relationship.
Contentions of Appellants Counsel
The arguments of Dr Mekwunye, learned counsel for the appellant, come to this. The lower court, which exercises both original and appellate jurisdiction, Sections 239, 249, 241, 242 and 243 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (amended) (hereinafter referred simply as “the 1999 Constitution”), was created to hear and determine appeals from specified trial courts, Section 237 of the 1999 Constitution and the Court of Appeal Act, Cap C36, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004.
Appellant’s Reply
As noted earlier, the learned counsel for the appellant, equally, adopted the Reply brief filed on December 16, 2015. In response the respondent’s submission, he canvassed the view that there are both constitutional statutory provisions empowering the lower court to exercise appellate jurisdiction over all decisions of the trial court: a jurisdiction exercisable either as of right or with leave, section 240; 243 (1)-(4); Section 24 (1) of the Court of Appeal Act and Order 7 Rules 5 and 10 (1), Court of Appeal Rules (supra).
Court’s Opinion on the Case
As shown earlier, the long title of the Third Alteration announces the raison deter for its promulgation, in this phraseology “An Act to alter the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria Cap 23, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004, for the establishment of the National Industrial Court under the Constitution,” (italics supplied for emphasis).
In the instant case, the Court of Appeal derives its appellate jurisdiction over all the courts catalogued in Section 240(supra) from the said constitutional provision. In this regard, I endorse the views of the prolific abd erudite Senior Advocate of Nigeria, S.T Hon, whi in his S.T. Hon’s Constitutional Law in Nigeria (Port Harcourt: Pearl Publishers Ltd, 2016)1101, contended that:
...it accords more with ‘common sense, order and good system,’ whereby the Court of Appeal, an intermediate appellate court, has been given jurisdiction to sit on appeal over decisions of all lower courts that fall immediately under the Court of Appeal in terms of judiciary hierarchy. The National Industrial Court, which belongs to that lower rung of courts cannot be an exception, save when the Constitution expressly states so, which is not the case.
The eminently erudite author prayed in aid the decisions of the court in A.D.H Ltd v Amalgamated Trustees Ltd (No 2) 2007 All FWLR (pt 392) 1781; Savannah Bank Ltd vs Ajilo (supra).
In all, then, on a holistic interpretation of Section 240 and 243 (1) of the 1999 Constitution, appeals lie from the trial court to the lower court, that is, all decisions of the trial court are appealable to the lower court; as of right in criminal matters, (section 243 (2); and, with the leave of the lower court in all other civil matters where the trial court has exercised its jurisdiction, sections 240, read conjunctively with section 243 (1) and (4).
The answers to the questions posed to this court in this case statement, therefore, are (a) the lower court, that is, the Court of Appeal has jurisdiction, to the exclusion of any other court in Nigeria, to hear and determine all appeals arising from the decisions of the trial court, that is the National Industrial Court; (b) no constitutional provisions expressly, divested the said Court of Appeal of its appellate jurisdiction over all decisions on civil matters emanating from the trial court, the National Industrial Court and (c) as a corollary, the jurisdiction of the court to hear and determine civil appeals from the decisions of the National Industrial Court is not limited, only, to the fundamental rights matters.
These shall be the opinion of this court to be transmitted to the Court of Appeal, Lagos Division, for its guidance in determining the appeal before it. Chima Centus Nweze Justice, Supreme Court.