Attorney General & Commissioner For Justice, Lagos State V. The Registered Trustees Of The Cattle Dealers Association Lagos State & Ors (2016)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

YARGATA BYENCHIT NIMPAR, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

This is an appeal against the ruling of the Federal High Court delivered by HON. JUSTICE A. M. LIMAN on the 18th of December, 2008 wherein the lower Court held that it had jurisdiction to entertain the suit. The Appellant was dissatisfied with the ruling, hence this appeal.

The brief facts of this appeal are that the 1st and 2nd Respondents commenced this action against the Attorney-General of the 36 States of the Federation including the Appellant and the 3rd and 4th Respondents. The proceeding was initiated by way of originating summons at the lower Court with respect to the mounting of road blocks for collection of levies from the members of the 1st and 2nd Respondents association.

In the course of proceedings, the trial Court suo motu ordered that parties address it on whether it has jurisdiction to hear the case. Consequently, the trial Court ruled that it has jurisdiction to entertain the case and it is against this ruling that the Appellant has brought the appeal.

The Appellant filed his brief of argument dated 11/09/13 on the 11/09/2013 which was

1

relied upon and adopted at the hearing of this appeal.

The 3rd and 4th Respondent brief dated 15/10/2015 was filed on the 19/10/15 and adopted at the hearing. Appellant was granted leave to proceed in its appeal against the only 5 parties Respondent on record it wished to proceed against. An order was equally granted to the Appellant to use and rely on the same record of Appeal in the sister appeal no: CA/L/772/2011.

The Appellant formulated a sole issue for determination as follows:

“Whether the Federal High Court is vested with Jurisdiction to entertain the claim against the backdrop of the Respective provisions of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) and Taxes and Levies (Approved Lists for Collection Act) CAP T2 LFN 2004”

On the part of the 3rd and 4th Respondents, they also formulated a sole issue for determination as follows:

“Whether having regards to the facts and circumstance of this case, the Federal High Court was right to assume jurisdictional competence to entertain this case”

The court shall adopt the issue formulated by the Appellant which is basically the same as the issues formulated by the 3rd and 4th

2