LEGAL PRINCIPLE: APPELLATE PRACTICE — Fresh Points on Appeal — Issue of Jurisdiction Raised from Judgment
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
An issue concerning jurisdiction that arises from the trial court's decision is not a new issue; it can be taken on appeal without leave, as jurisdiction can be raised at any stage.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Uwaifo, JSC, in Eze v. A.G., Rivers State (2001) NLC-841995(SC) at p. 43; Paras C–E.
"If that be the position, the question whether the said Decree No. 90 of 1979 would have a retrospective effect upon that transaction to deprive the court of jurisdiction has become an issue. That issue was raised at the trial court and consequently arose from the decision it arrived at based on the said Decree. I think it was out of abundance of caution that the appellant sought the leave of the lower court to appeal from the consequences thereof as a new issue. But the correct position, in my view, is that it is not a new issue but simply an issue arising from the judgment of the trial court which can be taken on appeal simpliciter. Furthermore, it concerns the issue of jurisdiction which can be raised at any stage of the proceedings whether at the trial or an appeal."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
A jurisdictional issue arising from the trial court’s judgment is not a new issue requiring leave. The appellant may challenge the court’s jurisdiction on appeal as of right. Jurisdiction can be raised at any stage, including for the first time on appeal. The principle combines two rules: (1) issues arising from the judgment are appealable without leave; (2) jurisdictional issues are never waived. The appellant does not need to seek leave to argue that the trial court lacked jurisdiction, even if the point was not raised below. The court must consider jurisdiction even if not raised. The principle ensures that jurisdictional defects are never insulated from appellate review.
