PRINCIPLE STATEMENT

The question of jurisdiction, being radically fundamental, can be raised at any stage of a proceeding and even for the first time in a court of last resort, such as the Supreme Court. Such an issue must, however, be properly raised before the court may rightly entertain the point. This is because an appellate court will not generally allow a fresh point to be taken before it if such a point was not pronounced upon by the court below.

RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)

Per Iguh, JSC, in Oshatoba & Anor v. Olujitan & Anor (2000) NLC-331994(SC) at pp. 11–12; Paras D–A.
"The question of jurisdiction, being radically fundamental, can be raised at any stage of a proceeding and even for the first time in a court of last resort, such as the Supreme Court. Such an issue must, however, be properly raised before the court may rightly entertain the point. This is because an appellate court will not generally allow a fresh point to be taken before it if such a point was not pronounced upon by the court below."
View Judgment

EXPLANATION / SCOPE

Jurisdiction is fundamental and can be raised at any stage—even for the first time in the Supreme Court—because a court cannot validly exercise jurisdiction it does not possess. However, the issue must be properly raised, not merely mentioned. While the Supreme Court may entertain such fresh points, appellate courts generally decline to consider issues not pronounced upon by the lower court unless they go to jurisdiction or are otherwise fundamental. This balances the overriding importance of jurisdiction with procedural regularity, ensuring parties do not spring purely tactical fresh points without justification.

CASES APPLYING THIS PRINCIPLE