A Critique of the Constitutional Jurisdiction of the National Industrial Court and Appellate Jurisprudence in Nigeria

Description

ABSTRACT

A Critique of the Constitutional Jurisdiction of the National Industrial Court and Appellate Jurisprudence in Nigeria

Judedavid Ogochukwu Mbamalu*

The appealability of the decision of the National Industrial Court [NIC], rendered in the exercise of its constitutional jurisdiction under section 254(C) thereof, has been resolved by the Supreme Court, which held that such decisions are appealable with leave of the Court of Appeal. It is not settled whether an appeal can lie as of right against the decision of NIC in an interlocutory proceeding, assuming jurisdiction on matters extrinsic to section 254 of the Constitution. This paper delves into this issue by looking at the definition of an appeal under our Laws, which definition did not accommodate the terminology; interlocutory appeal. An appeal is not segregated into interlocutory or final. Thus, the competence of an appeal against a decision of a court on an interlocutory application ought not to be overarched by the intermediate nature of the Proceeding in which the decision was given; the sole consideration should be the nature of the order test, that is, whether the decision terminally resolved the issue in contest in the interlocutory application. The principles for interpreting the Constitution are brought to bear in expounding the jurisdiction of NIC amidst the provisions of the Constitution on appeal processes.

Keywords: Jurisdiction, Appeal,1999 Constitution, Interlocutory Appeal, National Industrial Court, Supreme Court

INTRODUCTION
Whether a decision of the NIC that it has jurisdiction over a defendant whose profile is not recognisable under section 254(C) of the Nigerian Constitution can be appealed as of right to the Court of Appeal is the focus of this paper. In effect, this paper addresses the competence of an appeal without leave against the decision of the NIC, assuming jurisdiction to entertain a claim against a defendant exempted, by its status, from the confines of section 254C of the Constitution.

This paper explores the identified issue through case study analysis, the pivotal case being the case of Nnamdi Azunna v Denca Services Limited & The Nigerian Legion,₁ together with its derivative appeal in Denca Services Limited v Nnamdi Azunna,₂ and contends that appropriate interpretation of the Constitution estranges the term interlocutory appeal from our judicial lexicon; instead, an appeal is not qualified, but it may flow from the decision in interlocutory or final proceedings in a suit. In Denca’s case, the decision of NIC is considered to fall within the genre of decision that can be competently appealed without first seeking for and obtaining leave to appeal.

 * LL.B, BL, LL.M (Maritime & Commercial Law) (LASU), LL.M (Computer & Communication Law) (QMUL), LLD (UNISA). Managing Partner Jumbo Chambers. E-mail: ju***@ni*********.ng; Tel No: +2348033027118. je*****@ea******.com

1. Suit No:NICN/LA/158/2017.
2. [2019] 16 ACELR 137; [2018] LPELR-46043(CA). [1974] 1 All ER 980.

THE GRAVITAS REVIEW OF BUSINESS & PROPERTY LAW VOL.13 NO.1