HARRIMAN V. HARRIMAN

• Pages: 930-940

930



NIGERIAN SUPREME COURT CASES

[1987] 2 N.S.C.C.

BELGORE, J.S.C.:

I have had the opportunity of discussing and reading in draft

the judgment of my learned brother, Eso, J.S.C. and I agree with him. The matter

of jurisdiction in land matters follows the jurisdiction of its location; it will be

exceptional if it is otherwise. The Constitution of 1979 excised the area from

Mid-Western State encompassing the land now in question and merged it with



5

former Rivers State of that time. The constitution being the supreme law could not

be qualified in matters of jurisdiction, except it so clearly provides. There is merit

in this appeal and I agree with the reasonings on law as contained in the judgment

of my learned brother, Kayode Eso, J.S.C. I will for the same reasons allow this

appeal and make consequential order made therein by him.



10

Appeal allowed.

HARRIMAN V. HARRIMAN



15

IRENE HARRIMAN

V

CHIEF HOPE HARRIMAN

APPELLANT

RESPONDENT

SUIT NO. SC 228/1986

20

SUPREME COURT OF NIGERIA

ESO,



J.S.C.

ANIAGOLU,



J.S.C.

UWAIS,



J.S.C.

KAWU,



J.S.C.

BELGORE,



J.S.C.

26th June, 1987

Appeals - Appeal to Supreme Court - General powers of Supreme Court -

Cannot override s.219 of 1979 Constitution which gives exclusive jurisdiction

to determine appeals from High Courts to Court of Appeal - Purpose of -

General powers of Supreme

C01111

under s.22, Supreme Court Act.

35

Practice and Procedure - Leave to Appeal - Effect of failure to obtain leave to

add new grounds of appeal, where leave is required - Two separate rights

of appeal to Court of Appeal exist from decisions of High Cowl - Preferable

to file single notice of appeal on both rights of appeal than to file separate

notice.



40

ISSUES :

1.

Whether an appellant is precluded from appealing against an interlocutory

order where he has another appeal in the same matter still pending.

2.

If the answer to (1) above is in the affirmative, must the appellant obtain leave



45

of court before appealing.

3.

Whether the Supreme Court can in the exercise of its wide powers under s.22

of the Supreme Court Act, 1960, hear a substantive appeal still pending before

the Court of Appeal.

FACTS:



50

The respondent filed a divorce petition in the Lagos High Court against the ap-

pellant. His counsel later filed a notice of withdrawal which was duly served on

the appellant's counsel. On the day the notice of withdrawal came up for con-

sideration, counsel for the appellant opposed the application to withdraw and

25

30