GOVT. OF GONGOLA STATE V. TUKUR.

• Pages: 214-225

214



NIGERIAN SUPREME COURT CASES

[1989] 3 N.S.C.C.

CRAIG, J.S.C.:

I have had the pleasure of reading in draft the judgment of my

learned brother, Liwais, J.S.C. and I agree entirely with the views expressed therein

and the conclusions reached.

For the comprehensive reasons given in the lead judgment, I too would dismiss

this appeal and make the same consequential orders as to costs.



5

Appeal dismissed.

GOVT. OF GONGOLA STATE V. TUKUR



10

GOVERNMENT OF GONGOLA STATE



APPELLANT

V



15



ALHAJI UMARU ABBA TUKUR



RESPONDENT

SUIT NO. SC 148/1988

SUPREME COURT OF NIGERIA

OBASEKI,



J.S.C.

NNAMANI,



J.S.C.



20

KARIBI-WHYTE,



J.S.C.

OPUTA,



J.S.C.

BELGORE.



J.S.C.

AGBAJE,



J.S.C.



NNAEMEKA-AGU, J.S.C.



25

5th September, 1989

Practice and Procedure Federal High Court - Jurisdiction - Lack of

Judgments - Types - Declaratory and Executory



30

Stay of Execution - Purpose - Grant of - Guiding principles

Words and Phrases - Judgments and Orders - Definition - Stay of Execution - Meaning of:

ISSUES:



35

1.

Whether an appellate court can order a stay of execution where it has held that

a lower court has no jurisdiction to entertain the matter.

2.

Whether it is every judgment or order of a court that requires enforcement by the

parties.

3.

Whether a determination by a court that it has no jurisdiction to entertain a matter 40

confers any right which can be enforced.

4.

What is a judgment or order of court?

5.

What is a stay of execution and what purpose does it serve?

FACTS:

The plaintiff/respondent brought an action in the Federal High Court sitting in 45

Kano, challenging his deposition as a traditional ruler by the defendant/appellant.

The defendant/appellant unsuccessfully challenged the competency of the

Federal High Court to entertain the suit, and therefore appealed to the Court of

Appeal. The ground of appeal was that the Federal High Court had no jurisdiction

to entertain the suit. Though dealing with fundamental human Rights, since it was 50

inseparably interwoven with a chieftaincy question. The Court of Appeal entered

judgment for the defendant/appellant.

The plaintiff/respondent appealed to the Supreme Court against the Court of

Appeal's decision but in the interim, applied to the Court of Appeal for a stay of

execution. pending the determination of the appeal. The Court of Appeal granted

the stay.