LEGAL PRINCIPLE: JURISDICTION — Jurisdictional Error — Futility of Remitting Case for Re-admission of Evidence Where Jurisdiction Is Lacking
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
Since the court below agreed that courts had no jurisdiction, it would amount to a futile exercise to order re-admission of a document. The only justification would be if the document could reverse the conclusion that the court had no jurisdiction.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Oguntade, JSC, in Aribisala & Anor v. Ogunyemi & Ors (2005) NLC-2732000(SC) at pp. 6–7; Paras E–A.
"Since the court below had agreed with the High Court that courts had no jurisdiction in the matter, I think the court below was right as it would amount to a futile exercise to order that the document wrongly disallowed in evidence be re-admitted. The only reason which could justify such a course, was, if the document when re-admitted could reverse the conclusion earlier made that the court had no jurisdiction."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Remitting a case for re-admission of evidence is futile where the court lacks jurisdiction. Only if the evidence could change the jurisdictional conclusion would it be justified. The principle applies to civil procedure.