LEGAL PRINCIPLE: CONSTITUTIONAL LAW — Right of Access to Court — Statutory Alternative Remedy — Alternative Remedy Does Not Exclude Constitutional Right of Access
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
The subject's recourse to court for the determination of his rights is not to be excluded except by clear words. A statutory alternative remedy does not exclude the constitutional right of access unless the statute clearly makes it exclusive.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Ayoola, JSC, in Okeahialam & Anor v. Nwamara & Ors (2003) NLC-1961999(SC) at p. 5; Paras B–C.
"It is a principle not by any means to be whittled down that the subject's recourse to Her Majesty's courts for the determination of his rights is not to be excluded except by clear words ... Is it then an alternative or an exclusive remedy? There is nothing in the Act to suggest that, while a new remedy, perhaps cheap and expeditious, is given, the old and, as we like to call it, the inalienable remedy of Her Majesty's subjects to seek redress in her courts is taken away."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Constitutional right of access to court cannot be excluded by implication. The principle applies to constitutional law. A statutory alternative remedy is additional, not exclusive. The rule requires clear words to oust court jurisdiction. The right to seek judicial redress is inalienable. The principle is well-established.
