Cross River State Forestry Commission & Anor V. Muri Effiong Archibong Anwan & Ors (2012)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

UZO I. NDUKWE-ANYANWU, J.C.A (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

This is an appeal against the garnishee order absolute made by the Federal High Court sitting in Calabar.

When the judgment debtor/Appellant realized that a garnishee nisi had been ordered, the judgment debtor/Appellant filed a notice of preliminary objection on 24th day of September, 2008 that the Court lacked jurisdiction on the following grounds:

“1. The garnishee proceedings was commenced in contravention of Section 6(2) of the State Proceeding Laws of Cross River State, 2004 Cap.S16, in that the Applicants commenced the garnishee proceedings less than 90 days from the date this Honourable Court delivered its ruling.

2. The proceedings was initiated in violation of Section 84(1) of the Sheriffs and Civil Process Act, 2004 Cap. In that the Applicants did not seek and obtained the consent of the Attorney-General of Cross River state before applying to attach public funds.
3. The proceedings was commenced in defiance to Section 120(3) of the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999.
4. The entire proceedings constituted a gross abuse of the process of this Honourable Court.”

The judgment debtor also filed a motion on notice on 24th September, 2008 for a stay of execution against the Ruling of the Federal High Court dated 5th October, 2007 but delivered on 8th October, 2007. Written arguments were, therefore, ordered by the court.

The learned State counsel abandons ground one.

On ground two, the learned State Counsel submitted that Section 83(2) of the Sheriff and Civil Process Act provides:

“At least fourteen days before this day of hearing a copy of the order nisi shall be served upon the garnishee and the judgment debtor.”

The judgment debtors became aware of the garnishee proceedings when the garnishee – Zenith Bank wrote them a letter intimating the judgment debtors of the proceedings. Counsel submitted that failure to serve the judgment debtors with the garnishee order nisi is a fundamental error that robs the Court of jurisdiction. STB Ltd. vs. Contract Resources (Nig.) (2005) 6 NWLR Pt.708 page 115; NDIC vs. Ifediegwu (2003) 1 NWLR Pt.800 page 218; Onyewu vs. KSMGI (2003) 10 NWLR Pt.827 page 40.

Learned Counsel urged the Court to hold that the order nisi was not served on the judgment debtors and as such robs the Court of jurisdiction to continue.

The learned counsel to the judgment creditors didn’t have any answer to this. This is just his submission on this issue:

“Furthermore, the service of the order nisi was done in compliance with all the relevant, laws regarding the required statutory service period which is evident in Court Records.”

This issue is one on jurisdiction of the Court to hear this garnishee proceeding. The judgment debtors filed their preliminary objection challenging the jurisdiction of the Court in that amongst every other issue, the garnishee order nisi was not served on the judgment debtor.

Jurisdiction is very fundamental, as it should be determined first by the Courts before starting any proceedings. If the Court proceeds without jurisdiction, all proceedings amount to a nullity. Ukwu vs. Bunge (1997) 8 NWLR Pt. 518 page 527, UBN Plc (2000) 12 SC Pt.II page 113; A.G. Lagos State vs. Dosunmu (1989) 3 NWLR Pt. 111 page 552; Nnonye vs. Anyichie (2005) 2 NWLR Pt.910 page 623.