Onoriode Aziza, Associate (Nigeria) at Herbert Smith Freehills LLP, London in “Rethinking Jurisdiction under the Nigerian Legal System: Need for Realignment to First Principles” argues that the jurisdiction of a court is analogous to the judicial function of the sovereign power of the state, hence, a court only truly lacks jurisdiction if it lacks the authority to adjudicate over the subject-matter of the dispute. In all other cases, the court has jurisdiction, but through the exercise of its discretion, in line with statute or its rules, may decide not to exercise such jurisdiction. He examines the number of courts and tribunals of concurrent jurisdiction below the Court of Appeal and takes stock of the judiciary’s interpretation of the concept of jurisdiction, arguing that the courts have conflated the concepts of “jurisdiction” and “competence” or the “existence” and “exercise” of jurisdiction, using the Supreme Court decision in Agip Nigeria Limited v Agip Petroli International and Others as a case study. He calls for a reversal of the principles laid down in Madukolu v Nkemdilim, to the extent that the case purports to lay down principles to determine the existence of jurisdiction.