LEGAL PRINCIPLE: JURISDICTION – Competence of Court – Determination of Jurisdiction as Threshold Issue
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
The determination of the question whether the court before whom an action comes for adjudication has jurisdiction is a radical and crucial matter relating to its competence to hear the action. Hence, whenever the issue of competence and/or jurisdiction is raised before a court, it has invariably been considered both imperative and appropriate first to settle the question. The way the issue is settled will determine whether the court can proceed to hear the matter before it.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Karibi-Whyte, JSC, in Messrs. NV. Scheep v. MV "S.ARAZ" (2000) NLC-1671996(SC) at p. 25; Paras A–C.
"The determination of the question whether the court before whom an action comes for adjudication has jurisdiction is a radical and crucial matter relating to its competence to hear the action. Hence, whenever the issue of competence and/or jurisdiction is raised before a court, it has invariably been considered both imperative and appropriate first to settle the question. The way the issue is settled will determine whether the court can proceed to hear the matter before it."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Jurisdiction is a threshold issue that must be determined before proceeding to the merits. It is radical and crucial—if the court lacks jurisdiction, it cannot entertain the matter at all. When raised, the court must resolve it first, as the outcome dictates whether the court can proceed. This priority ensures judicial economy and prevents futile proceedings. Even if not raised, the court may consider jurisdiction suo motu. No substantive adjudication is permissible until jurisdiction is established. This preserves the integrity of judicial authority.