CIVIL PROCEDURE — Res Judicata — Trial Court Cannot Assume Jurisdiction in Part and Decline in Part
Ratio Decidendi
Per Adekeye, JSC, in Makun & Ors v. FUT, Minna (2011) NLC-123-241-2002(SC) at pp. 19—20; Paras E—A:
"I wish to point out that this court cannot assume jurisdiction on the 1st leg of the prayers and abandon the 2nd and 3rd prayers as contained in paragraphs 9(b) and (c) of the Statement of Claim. I cannot assume jurisdiction in part and then decline jurisdiction in part. When the court considers the totality of the claim and discloses that it has jurisdiction, it is its duty to assume jurisdiction but where he has jurisdiction in part only, he should decline it."
Explanation / Scope
This principle establishes that a court cannot assume jurisdiction over part of a claim and decline jurisdiction over another part. If the court has jurisdiction over the totality of the claim, it must assume jurisdiction; if it has jurisdiction only in part, it should decline jurisdiction entirely. The principle applies where jurisdiction is challenged. It ensures that jurisdiction is determined holistically. The principle reflects the indivisibility of jurisdiction over a claim. It prevents partial adjudication. The court must consider the totality of the claim. The principle provides guidance on assuming jurisdiction.