Examination of the territorial jurisdiction of the national industrial court of Nigeria and the service of processes outside the jurisdiction of the court

Abstract

Sections 97, 98 and 99 of the Sheriffs and Civil Process Act (SCPA) requires that, originating processes to be served outside the issuing state, must be endorsed that, same is for service outside the issuing State or the Federal Capital Territory for their service to be valid. Giving the fact that, the National Industrial Court of Nigeria (NICN), just like the Federal High Court (FHC), has a nationwide jurisdiction, does the above requirement of the SCPA applies to the NICN? Does the failure to specifically mention the NICN in the definition section of the SCPA as courts is the NICN not excluded? Docs the specialised nature of the NICN exclude it from the application of the SCPA as far as endorsement and service of originating processes is concerned? These issues, form the crux of this paper which adopts the doctrinal methodology to evaluate these issues by reviewing the Court of Appeal decision in Johnson v. Ezc. It argues that, the NICN having a nationwide coverage with judicial divisions for administrative and adjudicatory efficiency, the requirement of the SCPA is inapplicable. Aside being a specialised court poised at efficient and timeous adjudication, the exclusion of the NICN in the definition section of the SCPA, although being of coordinate jurisdiction with other High Courts (IIC), buttresses the inapplicability of the SCPA endorsement requirement. It argues that, the decision is a welcomed development; it will aid continuous efficiency of the NICN; insulate it from potential technicalities arising from the applicability of the requirement of the SCPA based on the sensitive subject matter it adjudicates upon.