MAJOROH V. FASSASSI

• Pages: 774-776

774



NIGERIAN SUPREME COURT CASES

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

MAJOROH V. FASSASSI

ARCHITECTS REGISTRATION COUNCIL

OF NIGERIA



APPELLANT

In re: O.C. Majoroh

V



PROFESSOR M.A. FASSASSI



RESPONDENT

SUIT NO. SC 193/1986

SUPREME COURT OF NIGERIA

ESO,



J.S.C.

ANIAGOLU,



J.S.C.

KAZEEM,



J.S.C.

OPUTA,



J.S.C.

BELGORE,



J.S.C.

3rd June, 1987

Appeal- Appeal to Supreme Court - Power of Supreme

COUli

to review order

after judgment - Supreme Court fiinctus officio after judgment no matter

nature of error it may have committed in judgment - No constitutional or

statutory power vests in Supreme Court to review order after delivering



25

judgment.

ISSUE:

1. Whether the Supreme Court has power to review its order once it has delivered

a final judgment and an order has been made.



30

FACTS:

Judgment was delivered in the Supreme Court on the 2nd of June, 1987 in an

appeal involving the parties. The following day counsel for the appellant brought

an application in which he sought to have the Supreme Court review the order it

made in the judgment. The argument before the court centred on whether the ap-



35

plication was not of the same type as the court decided upon in

Adigun's case

No.

2 (1987) 2 N.W.L.R. 197 and in which the Supreme Court refused to accede to the

request to review its judgment on the ground that it had no jurisdiction so to do.

Learned counsel for the appellant, Chief F.R.A. Williams, S.A.N., argued that the

application in this matter is distinguishable from that in

Adigun's case No.

2. He



40

further sought to distinguish between inherent jurisdiction and jurisdiction.

HELD:

1.

The Supreme Court is not vested with any constitutional or statutory powers to

review its order once a judgment is delivered. As such whatever jurisdiction

the court could be said to possess to review itself, could only be inherent, and



45

these the Supreme Court fully considered in

Adigun's case.

2.

Once a court has finally determined an issue before it, it is

functus officio

and

the judgment if delivered by a court below the Supreme Court can only be

corrected on appeal. In the Supreme Court, its decision in respect of that case

is final for all ages and only a legislation

ad homine

can alter it.



50

3.

In the instant case, the Supreme Court is being asked in this application to

review its judgment of 2nd June, 1987 on the ground that it has no jurisdiction

to make the order. There is no court of appeal above the Supreme Court and

the order stands forever.

5

10

15

20