LEGAL PRINCIPLE: CIVIL PROCEDURE – Jurisdiction – Determination of Nature of Action – Court Must Examine Plaintiff’s Statement of Claim Only
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
The law is sufficiently settled that in determining whether the plaintiff's (respondent's) action discloses any cause of action or the nature thereof, the court will necessarily restrict itself to the plaintiffs/respondent's statement of claim without recourse to the defendant's/appellant's statement of defence vide Shell B.P. Ltd. & Ors. v. Onasanya (1976) NSCC 334 at 336, (1976) 6 SC 89. See also Aladegbemi v. Fasanmade (1988) 3 NWLR (Part 81) 129.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Onu, JSC, in *7-UP Bottling Company Ltd. & Ors v. Abiola and Sons Bottling Company Ltd.* (2001) NLC-631996(SC) at p. 13; Paras A–B.
"The law is sufficiently settled that in determining whether the plaintiff's (respondent's) action discloses any cause of action or the nature thereof, the court will necessarily restrict itself to the plaintiffs/respondent's statement of claim without recourse to the defendant's/appellant's statement of defence vide Shell B.P. Ltd. & Ors. v. Onasanya (1976) NSCC 334 at 336, (1976) 6 SC 89. See also Aladegbemi v. Fasanmade (1988) 3 NWLR (Part 81) 129."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
When determining jurisdiction or whether a cause of action is disclosed, the court examines only the plaintiff’s statement of claim—not the defendant’s statement of defence. The defence cannot cure a defective claim, nor can it defeat a valid claim at the jurisdictional stage. The court assumes the plaintiff’s facts as pleaded are true for this purpose. The defendant’s response is irrelevant to whether the claim, on its face, discloses a recognizable cause of action. This principle prevents defendants from defeating jurisdiction by filing defences that introduce extraneous matters. The focus is on the plaintiff’s pleaded case alone.