LEGAL PRINCIPLE: JURISDICTION – Statutory Interpretation – Ouster Provisions – Restrictive Construction Required
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
Courts jealously guard their jurisdiction; ouster provisions in any statute must be scrupulously examined and will not be construed to extend beyond their ordinary meaning.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Kalgo, JSC, in Nigeria Engineering Works Ltd. v. Denap Ltd. & Anor (2001) NLC-1631997(SC) at p. 18; Paras A–A.
"It is well settled that the courts jealously guard their jurisdiction and any signal of ouster of jurisdiction in any statute must be scrupulously examined and would not be construed, without any express provision, to extend beyond its ordinary meaning. This is the general attitude of superior courts on ouster provisions."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Courts adopt a restrictive construction of ouster provisions (clauses that attempt to exclude judicial review). Such provisions are scrutinised strictly and not extended beyond their ordinary meaning. The court jealously guards its jurisdiction. Any ambiguity is resolved against ouster. The presumption is that courts retain jurisdiction unless clearly and unequivocally ousted. The principle reflects the constitutional role of courts as guardians of legality. Ouster clauses are not favoured; they are construed narrowly. The executive cannot rely on ambiguous language to immunise acts from judicial review. The court will not infer ouster from doubtful or unclear provisions.