JURISDICTION – Jurisdiction of Court – Sharia Court of Appeal – Form CA9 – Effect on Jurisdiction

Form CA9 (parties’ consent to Sharia Court determination) cannot confer jurisdiction where none exists constitutionally. Constitutional limitation: Sharia Court of Appeal jurisdiction is limited to Islamic personal law matters enumerated in Constitution (Principle 579)—parties cannot expand it by consent. Form CA9 irrelevant: Even if parties sign form consenting to Sharia Court determination: cannot create jurisdiction over non-Islamic personal law matters, cannot override constitutional limits, and cannot validate proceedings in matters beyond jurisdiction. This serves: maintaining constitutional jurisdictional boundaries, preventing jurisdictional expansion by consent, and preserving High Court’s residual jurisdiction. Why consent doesn’t confer jurisdiction: Jurisdiction is constitutional matter, not contractual—parties cannot: create jurisdiction by agreement, expand court’s constitutional powers, or override jurisdictional limitations. “Regardless of…Form CA9” means: consent is irrelevant to jurisdiction, signing form doesn’t help, and jurisdictional limits remain despite consent. This prevents: parties from choosing inappropriate forum through consent, circumventing jurisdictional rules, and Sharia Court exceeding constitutional bounds. Application: Even when both Muslim parties consent to Sharia Court determination of land dispute: if matter isn’t Islamic personal law (inheritance, wakf, gift, will), Sharia Court lacks jurisdiction, and consent cannot cure defect. This principle establishes that constitutional jurisdiction cannot be created or expanded by parties’ agreement or consent.