LEGAL PRINCIPLE: JURISDICTION — Ouster Clause — Effect of Ouster Clause Where Tribunal Exceeds Jurisdiction — Ouster Clause Does Not Protect Tribunal Acting in Excess of Jurisdiction
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
Where a tribunal acts within its jurisdiction, an ouster clause bars proceedings; but where the tribunal acts in excess of its jurisdiction, the High Court has power to grant an order of certiorari or prohibition.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Ogwuegbu, JSC, in Onyeanusi v. Miscellaneous Offences Tribunal (2002) NLC-491996(SC) at p. 16; Paras A–C.
"Where the tribunal acts within its jurisdiction, section 8(1) of Decree No. 20 of 1984 as amended is emphatic and absolute in its stipulation that no proceeding shall lie or be instituted in any court for or on account of any act, or matter or thing done or purported to be done under or pursuant to the decree. But where the tribunal has acted in excess of its jurisdiction, for example, if the offence of arson is not triable by it, certainly the High Court has the power to grant an order of certiorari."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
An ouster clause protects acts done within jurisdiction. It does not protect acts done in excess of jurisdiction. The High Court retains supervisory jurisdiction to determine whether the tribunal exceeded its powers. The principle is based on Anisminic v. Foreign Compensation Commission. The court may grant certiorari or prohibition to correct excess of jurisdiction. The ouster clause is no bar where jurisdiction is exceeded. The rule prevents tribunals from acting without legal authority. The applicant must show that the tribunal acted outside its statutory powers. The principle ensures that ouster clauses are not used to shield ultra vires acts. The court will examine the jurisdictional limits.