CIVIL PROCEDURE — Jurisdiction — Competence of Court — Defect in Constitution as Regards Members Renders Proceedings a Nullity
Ratio Decidendi
Per Kalgo, JSC, in Sokoto State Govt & Ors v. Kamdex Nigeria Limited (2007) NLC-123-74-2004(SC) at pp. 15–16; Paras B–D:
"A court is competent when (1) It is properly constituted as regards members and qualifications of the members of the bench and no member is disqualified for one reason or the other. ... Any defect in competence is fatal, for the proceedings are a nullity however well conducted and decided; the defect is extrinsic to adjudication. ... In the circumstances of this case, ... point (1) ... cannot be satisfied ... because although three Justices of the court are qualified to hear and determine the appeal, one of them is not qualified because he never heard the appeal and for that reason alone, he is disqualified. This is a defect in the competence of the court and therefore the proceedings of the court with him taking part are a nullity however well conducted."
Explanation / Scope
The principle is fundamental to adjudication and the exercise of judicial power. Competence is a condition precedent to the valid exercise of jurisdiction; a court may possess jurisdiction over a subject matter but lack competence if improperly constituted. The requirements include the correct number of justices, their proper qualifications, and the absence of any disqualification, such as bias or failure to participate in the hearing. A justice who did not hear the appeal cannot validly participate in the judgment. Such a defect is extrinsic to the adjudication and cannot be cured by the merit of the decision or the consent of the parties. The nullity is automatic and renders all proceedings void ab initio. The principle ensures fair hearing and the integrity of the judicial process.