JURISDICTION — Federal High Court — Exclusive Jurisdiction under Section 7 of the Federal High Court Act — Claim for breach of contract not within exclusive jurisdiction
Principle Statement
The guide in the determination of jurisdiction of a court is the subject matter of the claim as endorsed in the writ of summons. I have already shown that the action is for a breach of contract. This claim has nothing to do with the management of the company. The issue of assessment for damages is merely ancillary. In the result the Federal High Court has no jurisdiction to hear and determine this claim.
Ratio Decidendi (Source)
Per Katsina-Alu, JSC, in Osun State Govt v. Dalami Nigeria Limited (2007) NLC-123-277-2002(SC) at p. 13; Paras A–C.
"The guide in the determination of jurisdiction of a court is the subject matter of the claim as endorsed in the writ of summons. I have already shown that the action is for a breach of contract. This claim has nothing to do with the management of the company. The issue of assessment for damages is merely ancillary. In the result the Federal High Court has no jurisdiction to hear and determine this claim."
Explanation / Scope
This principle establishes that the Federal High Court’s exclusive jurisdiction does not extend to ordinary breach of contract claims. Jurisdiction is determined by the subject matter in the writ of summons. Where the claim is for breach of contract with damages as relief, the Federal High Court lacks jurisdiction unless the contract relates to matters within its exclusive jurisdiction. Ancillary matters like damages do not confer jurisdiction. The principle ensures that contract claims are heard in the appropriate court. The court must examine the nature of the claim. The principle applies to all jurisdictional determinations.
Cases Applying This Principle
None recorded.
