The Supreme Court of Nigeria and Development of Legal Practice: The Supreme Court’s Voyage of Distinction without a Difference

The Supreme Court of Nigeria and Development of Legal Practice: The Supreme Court’s Voyage of Distinction without a Difference

Abstract: This article reviews the Supreme Court’s (SC) decision in Heritage Bank Ltd. v Bentworth Finance (Nig.) Ltd. where the Court held that a Statement of Claim signed by a legal practitioner unknown to law contrary to the provisions of sections 2(1) and 24 of the Legal Practitioners Act 1962 do not render the proceedings null and void. According to the Apex Court, such franking, is a procedural as opposed to substantive irregularity and that failure to have raised the point at the trial court amounts to waiver and the point cannot be raised at the Supreme Court having not been canvassed at the Court of Appeal(CA). This is so even though it is contrary to the trite position of the law that issue of jurisdiction can be raised at any time and even at the SC for the first time. This paper through doctrinal methodology argues that this decision obliterates from the trite position of the law as enunciated in the SC’s earlier decisions in Nweke v Okafor, SLB Consortium v NNPC, First Bank v Maiwada, Oketade v Adewunmi and that the decision is a fruitless voyage of a distinction without a difference. It also encourages irresponsibility on the part of counsel in signing court documents which is aided by lack of judicial foresight. It therefore urges the SC whenever the opportunity presents itself, to revert to its earlier position which is in tandem with the law.

KIULJ Volume. 3, Issue 2 (2019)

Contributor(s)

Keywords

Download Full-text (PDF)

The Supreme Court of Nigeria and Development of Legal Practice: The Supreme Court’s Voyage of Distinction without a Difference