LEGAL PRINCIPLE: CONSTITUTIONAL LAW — Jurisdiction — High Court — Unlimited Jurisdiction Limited Only by Express Constitutional Provisions
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
The limit to the otherwise unlimited jurisdiction vested in the High Court can only be as may be expressly provided by the Constitution. Merely vesting jurisdiction not described as exclusive in another court does not limit the High Court's jurisdiction.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
"The limit to the otherwise unlimited jurisdiction vested in the High Court can only be as may be expressly provided by the constitution. Merely vesting jurisdiction not described as exclusive in another court and which may be exercised concurrently with the High Court of a state would not, in my view, limit the jurisdiction of such High Court. That the provisions of section 236(1) of the 1979 constitution did not permit the unlimited jurisdiction vested in the High Court of a state to be limited other than the constitution itself may have provided, is an opinion that has been expressed in several decisions of this court."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
The High Court’s unlimited jurisdiction under Section 236(1) of the 1979 Constitution can only be limited by express constitutional provisions. Vesting jurisdiction in another court that is not described as exclusive does not limit the High Court’s jurisdiction. The High Court may exercise concurrent jurisdiction with other courts. Only express words vesting exclusive jurisdiction in another court will suffice. The principle ensures that the High Court’s residual jurisdiction is not eroded by implication. The court will not infer ouster of jurisdiction. The rule applies to all constitutional provisions. The burden is on the party alleging ouster to show express constitutional limitation. The principle protects access to the High Court as a court of general jurisdiction.
