Download PDF
<p class="MsoNormalCxSpFirst" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: justify;"><u><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">REPRESENTATION</span></u><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Olufemi Awojide for the Claimants.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Napolean Emeaso-Nwachukwu for 1<sup>st</sup> & 2<sup>nd</sup> Defendants.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Mosunmola Osikoya for 3rd & 3<sup>rd</sup> Defendants.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" align="center" style="text-align: center;"><u><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">RULING<o:p></o:p></span></u></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" align="center" style="text-align: center;"><u><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></u></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">The Claimant approached this Court on 20/4/15 and sought the following reliefs -<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">1. An interpretation of and the applicability of the Terms of Settlement dated 8<sup>th</sup> September 2010 which was adopted as Judgment of the High Court of Lagos State in Suit no. ID/853/2008 dated 1<sup>st</sup> November 2010 between the parties in the suit.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">2. A consequential order directing the 2<sup>nd</sup> Respondent to effect the formation of Nigeria Union of Pensioners Teachers Pensioners Branch forthwith in line with terms of the consent judgment. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpLast" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">3. A consequential order directing the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> Respondents to render account of the check off dues which has accrued to the covers of the 2<sup>nd</sup> Respondent since the delivery of the consent judgment till date. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="margin-left: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">4. A consequential order directing the 2<sup>nd</sup> Respondent to halt or stop further disbursement of check off dues to any group until the formation of the NUP Teacher Pensioners branch.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">5. General Damages against the 1<sup>st</sup> and 2<sup>nd</sup> Defendants in the sum of =N=1,000,000.00 only.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="margin-left: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">The processes filed by the Claimant included all documents as required by the Rules of this Court. The Claimants/Applicants also filed a Motion on Notice dated 14/4/15. In it, the Applicants sought the following reliefs -<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpFirst" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">1. An interpretation of and the applicability of the Terms of Settlement dated 8<sup>th</sup> September 2010 which was adopted as Judgment of the High Court of Lagos State in Suit no. ID/853/2008 dated 1<sup>st</sup> November 2010 between the parties in the suit.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">2. A consequential order directing the 2<sup>nd</sup> Respondent to effect the formation of Nigeria Union of Pensioners Teachers Pensioners Branch forthwith in line with terms of the consent judgment. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">3. A consequential order directing the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> Respondents to render account of the check off dues which has accrued to the covers of the 2<sup>nd</sup> Respondent since the delivery of the consent judgment till date. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">4. A consequential order directing the 2<sup>nd</sup> Respondent to halt or stop further disbursement of check off dues to any group until the formation of the NUP Teacher Pensioners branch. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpLast" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">5. And for such further or other orders as this Honourable Court may deem fit to make in the circumstances.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-left: 0in; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">The Defendants entered an appearance on 19/6/15 and filed a Notice of Preliminary Objection on 22/5/15 against the Motion on Notice dated 14/4/15. This preliminary objection was filed on behalf of the 3rd & 4th Defendants/Respondents and it is to contend that ''the application is incompetent and the court lacks jurisdiction to entertain it''.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpFirst" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">The grounds for the application were stated as follows -<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 17.85pt; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">1. By virtue of Section 254 (c) of the 1999 Constitution this Court is a Court of coordinate jurisdiction with the High Court of Lagos State.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left: 0.25in; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">2. There is no life issue before this Court.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">The 1st and 2nd Defendants also brought a Notice of Preliminary Objection. It was dated 27/10/15 and filed on 28/10/15. It was for an order dismissing this Suit in its entirety for lack of jurisdiction and was brought on the following grounds -<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">1. This Honourable Court lacks the requisite jurisdiction to review, interpret or sit on appeal on its own judgment and those of Courts of co-ordinate jurisdiction. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">2. The judgment sought to be interpreted by the Claimants is a judgment of the High Court of Lagos State which is a Court of co-ordinate jurisdiction with this Honourable Court. Hence this Court lacks the requisite jurisdiction to interpret same.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">3. This institution of this suit is an abuse of the due process of Court.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">The Claimants having responded as necessary, the Court directed that both Notices be taken together to save time of Court. Both Notices were heard on 15/3/16. Arguing his Notice of Preliminary Objection dated 27/10/15 and filed on 28/10/15, learned Counsel adopted his written address dated 27/10/15 and filed on 28/10/15 as his argument. In it learned Counsel set down the following issue down for determination - <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> ''Whether this Honourable Court has the jurisdiction to interpret the Judgment of the High Court of Lagos State which is a Court of coordinate jurisdiction with this Honourable Court?'' <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Arguing this issue, learned Counsel submitted that jurisdiction is the life-blood of every suit and that when a Court before which a suit is pending has no jurisdiction the matter would be struck out or dismissed. Counsel cited <i>Madukolu v. Nkemdilim (1962)2 SCNLR 341 & Arowolo v. Adesina (2011)2 NWLR (Pt. 1231) 320. </i>Submitting further, learned Counsel stated that in determining whether or not a Court has jurisdiction to adjudicate over a matter before it, recourse is had to the statement of claim citing <i>Nnaji v. Nigerian Football Association (2001)All FWLR (Pt. 559) 1197.</i> According to learned Counsel a perusal of paragraphs 1, 2, 22 & 23 of the statement of facts would reveal among others that the Claimants were not parties to the suit whose Judgment this Court is called upon to interpret. Learned Counsel cited section 7 (1)(c), <i>National Industrial Court Act, 2006 </i>and<i> </i>sections 254C, <i>Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (Third Alteration) Act, 2010</i> as the sections of the statute conferring jurisdiction on this Court and that this Court being a Court of coordinate jurisdiction cannot interpret the Judgment of the High Court of Lagos. Learned Counsel cited <i>LSDPC v. Adeyemi-Bero (2005)All FWLR (Pt. 252) 488 & First Bank Plc & Anor. v. First City Monument Bank Plc & Anor. (2013) LPELR-22050 (CA). </i>Counsel urged the Court to dismiss the application as the Court lacks the requisite jurisdiction.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">In the Notice of Preliminary Objection filed on behalf of the 3rd and 4th Defendants, it was contended that the Claimants application dated 14/4/15 is incompetent and that the Court lacks jurisdiction. Learned Counsel set down 3 main issues for determination in this application. They are as follows -<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">1. Whether the Claimants/Applicants' suit is competent in the circumstance herein.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">2. Whether the reliefs being sought in the Claimants'/Applicants' Motion on Notice are related to the claims before this Court. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Counsel submitted that the Judgment being sought to be interpreted and applied is a Judgment of the High Court of Lagos State; that by virtue of section 254C, <i>Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (Third Alteration) Act, 2010, </i>this Court is a Court of coordinate jurisdiction with that Court and as such cannot sit over that Judgment in whatever capacity or interpret its Judgment citing <i>Madukolu v. Nkemdilim (1962)1 All NLR (Pt. 4) 557</i> for the proposition that this Court lacks requisite jurisdiction. Arguing further, Counsel submitted that there is no life issue in this case for the Court to determine, that since the Claimants have admitted in their pleadings that the issues between the parties had already been determined by the High Court of Lagos State this suit has thus become mere academic exercise particularly when the said Judgment is a consent Judgment voluntarily entered into by the parties. Counsel cited <i>Union Bank v. Edionseri (1988) NWLR (Pt. 74) 93, Akeredolu v. Akinremi (1986)2 NWLR (Pt. 25) 710 at 725 & Asafa Food Factory Limited v. Alraine Nigeria Limited (2002) NWLR (Pt. 781) 353.</i> Finally, learned Counsel urged the Court to dismiss the Claimants application with cost and hold the Claimants to be professional litigants, citing <i>Senator Adesanya v. President of Nigeria (1981)12 NSCC 146 at 179.<o:p></o:p></i></span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">In opposition to the Notice of Preliminary Objection of the 3rd & 4th Defendants, the Claimants filed a 5-paragraph counter affidavit, one exhibit and a written address. Counsel placed reliance on all the averments in the counter affidavit and adopted the written address as his argument. In the written address, learned Counsel set down a lone issue as follows for determination -<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> Whether the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th Defendants/Applicants' application for dismissing this suit should be granted by this Honourable Court.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Arguing this issue, stated that a terms of Settlement dated 28/9/10 was adopted as judgment of the High Court of Lagos State in Suit No. ID/853/2008 dated 1/11/10 between the parties in this suit; that with the active connivance of the 2nd Applicant, the 1st Applicant has so far collected above =N=6,000,000.00 out of the check off dues of the Teachers Pensioners contrary to the terms of the consent judgment and has refused to render account of same and that pursuant this the Claimants have brought an action to Court to stop the 1st and 2nd Applicants from illegally dealing with the check off dues of the Respondents. Counsel submitted that the provisions of Section 7(1), <i>National Industrial Court Act, 2006 & Section 254C(1), Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (Third Alteration) Act, 2010</i> clearly give this Court the power to adjudicate on the Claimants' suit; that by these Notices of Preliminary Objection, the Applicants are seeking to stifle the rights of the Claimants to ventilate their grievances about the way the 1st and 2nd Defendants/Applicants have subverted the purport and substance of the consent judgment between the parties and that it is erroneous and a misconception on the part of the Applicants to contend that there is no life issue in the present suit before the Court as the endorsement on the Complaint and statement of facts are clear and unambiguous. Counsel urged the Court to dismiss the preliminary objection with cost of =N=50, 000.00 and assume jurisdiction on the Claimants' suit in the interest of justice.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">I heard learned Counsel on either on the two Notices of Preliminary Objection. I followed their line of argument and understood same. I also read with understanding all the processes filed. I need to point out that the basis of the Notice of Preliminary Objection filed by the 3rd and 4th Defendants was respecting the Motion on Notice filed by the Claimants and dated 14/4/15 which is challenged on grounds inter alia that it is incompetent and that the Court lacks jurisdiction. On the other hand, the Notice of Preliminary Objection dated 27/10/15 and filed 28/10/15 was respecting the entire suit in its entirety for absence of jurisdiction on the part of the Court. I note also that indeed the reliefs sought in the Motion on Notice dated 14/4/15 are more or less a reproduction of the reliefs sought in the main suit. Having considered all the processes filed and argument of learned Counsel on either side, I adopt the issue for determination as set down by the 1st and 2nd Defendants/Applicants in their Notice of Preliminary Objection as follows -<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> Whether this Honourable Court has the jurisdiction to interpret the judgment of the High Court of Lagos State which is a Court of co-ordinate jurisdiction with this Honourable Court.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">The fact remains that issues of jurisdiction are fundamental issues which a Court must resolve before it takes further steps in a matter before it. If a Court is divested of jurisdiction, the end result is mere efforts in futility no matter the ingenuity, erudition and brilliance of the trial Judge. Thus, if a Court does not have jurisdiction to hear and determine a case in the first place, it is in much the same vein divested of jurisdiction to grant any application brought before it by a party seeking some reliefs.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">The fact of this case, in brief, is that the High Court of Lagos State, per <i>Oyefeso J,</i> in <i>Suit No: ID/853/2008 </i>delivered a Judgment on 1/11/10. That Judgment was a consent Judgment in that the parties in the case filed a Terms of Settlement and approached the Court to enter same as judgment of Court. There is no evidence before me to the effect that either side in that case has appealed against same. The present suit filed by the Claimants on 20/4/15 is for this Court to interpret and determine the application of the Terms of Settlement adopted as Judgment of <i>Oyefeso J</i>, consequential orders and general damages. This Court, the <i>National Industrial Court of Nigeria </i>is a trial Court and a Court of first instance, just like the High Court of Lagos State presided over by <i>Oyefeso J. </i>In other words, the High Court of Lagos State and this Court are Courts of coordinate jurisdiction.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">What then is the jurisdiction of this Court with respect to the suit filed and reliefs sought by the Claimants/Respondents? Jurisdiction is usually conferred on a Court by a statute. Section 7, <i>National Industrial Court of Nigeria Act, 2006 </i>and Section 254C, <i>Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (Third Alteration) Act, 2010 </i>confer jurisdiction on this Court. Now, by section 7(1)(c)(iii), <i>National Industrial Court of Nigeria Act, 2006 </i>and section 254C(1)(j)(iv) & (v), <i>Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (Third Alteration) Act, 2010, </i>this Court has jurisdiction over the determination of question as to the interpretation and application of ''the terms of settlement of any labour dispute, organizational dispute as may be recorded in any memorandum of settlement'', ''any term of settlement of any trade dispute'', and ''any trade union dispute or employment dispute as may be recorded in a memorandum of settlement''. The exercise of this jurisdiction must be understood to mean with respect to the Court within the statute. Thus, under section 54(1), <i>National Industrial Court Act, 2006, </i>the Court is defined to mean ''the National Industrial Court and includes the Judges of the National Industrial Court sitting together or separately''.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">The consent Judgment upon which the Claimants want this Court to exercise its interpretative jurisdiction was not delivered by this Court. It was delivered by the High Court of Lagos State. That Court, as earlier stated in this Ruling, is a Court of coordinate jurisdiction with this Court. While this Court has jurisdiction to interpret its own Judgment, the power to exercise the same jurisdiction over Judgment of Court of coordinate jurisdiction is not conferred by the statute setting this Court up. Neither can the authority to so act be found in judicial pronouncements of the appellate Courts. Indeed in <i>Lagos State Property Development Corporation v. Adeyemi-Bero (2005) All FWLR (Pt. 252) 486 at 500, Salami JCA</i> (as he then was) postulated on the position of the law aptly as follows -<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> ''A Court cannot sit on appeal over its own judgment nor review the judgment of a court of coordinate jurisdiction. Thus, a person interested in a judgment by a court cannot apply by originating summons or by any other application to another court of coordinate jurisdiction to resolve any question of construction or interpretation arising in the judgment as that will amount to that court being invited to sit in judgment over the decision or order made by a brother Judge. Such a course of action or step is without competence''. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">See also <i>National Insurance Corporation of Nigeria v. Power & Industrial Engineering Company Limited (1990)1 NWLR (Pt. 129) 697.<o:p></o:p></i></span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">The bottom line of all this is that this Court, the <i>National Industrial Court of Nigeria, </i>both under the statute as well as the case law lacks the jurisdiction to interpret the judgment of the High Court of Lagos as sought by the Claimants. The Preliminary Objection of the Defendants/Applicants therefore succeeds. The case of the Claimants is thus dismissed for all the reasons as stated in this Ruling.</span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Ruling is entered accordingly.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpLast" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" align="center" style="margin-left: 0in; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">____________________<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" align="center" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Hon. Justice J. D. Peters<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormalCxSpFirst" align="center" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Presiding Judge</span></p><p class="MsoNormalCxSpFirst" align="center" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size:12.5pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><br></span></p>