National Bank (Nigeria) Ltd. & Anor V. John Akinkunmi Shoyoye & Anor (1977)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

A. O. OBASEKI, J.S.C

This appeal is against the judgement of the Western State Court of Appeal delivered on the 10th day of January, 1975 reversing the interlocutory decision of the High Court of the Western State (Adewale Thompson, J) sitting at Abeokuta on the 30th day of April, 1971 overruling the defendants/respondents’ objection as to jurisdiction on the ground of incorrect venue.

The point of objection we may observe, was not raised in the pleadings which had been filed and duly delivered. The case had been set down and called for hearing when the learned Counsel for the defendants/respondents raised the point by way of preliminary objection that the action was instituted in the Court (High Court of Justice, Western State and holden at Abeokuta) that had no jurisdiction to hear it. He contended that the proper Court or venue was the High Court of Lagos State.

The grounds on which he founded the objection were:

(1) That the defendants were resident in Lagos and were served there;

(2) That the 1st plaintiffs headquarters was Lagos; and

(3) That the overdraft was taken from the 1st plaintiff in Lagos.

In a considered ruling, the learned trial judge, Adewale Thompson, J. held that the objection was misconceived and overruled and dismissed it with some (Ten guineas ) costs to the plaintiff.

The defendants with leave of the High Court, appealed to the Western State Court of Appeal. After hearing Counsel, the Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and struck out the suit. In allowing the appeal, (the learned Justices of) the Western State Court in the penultimate paragraph of the judgement delivered by Adegboyega Ademola, J .A. said:

“All we would say is that on the facts of this case, no Judicial Division of the High Court of the Western State had jurisdiction to entertain this case. The action should have been instituted in the High Court of Lagos State. We therefore allow the appeal and strike out the action of the plaintiffs/ respondents.”

Against this judgement, the appellant filed five grounds of appeal but argued only three of them (grounds 1, 2 and 5) which read:

(1) The learned Judges of Appeal erred in law in their wrongful admission and/or assumption of evidence to arrive at their decision and thereby occasioned a miscarriage of justice.

(2) The learned Judges of Appeal erred in their conclusions that the action was wrongly commenced in the Abeokuta Judicial Division when it was the most proximate judicial division to the last known place of residence or trading address of the defendants at the institution of the action:

(3) The learned Judges of Appeal erred in law in not considering the submission of the applicant’s Counsel as to the nature of the plaintiffs/ appellants’ case on the ground that it was not preferred in argument in the court below when it is always open to a respondent to meet preliminary objections on any general grounds available from the facts of the case at any stage of the proceedings.