ON EFFECT OF BREACH OF FAIR HEARING ON JURISDICTION OF COURT.

 

A fair hearing, a fundamental principle of natural justice, ensures that all parties involved in a legal or administrative proceeding have an equal opportunity to present their case and be heard before a decision is made. It encompasses the right to present evidence, cross-examine witnesses, and be judged by an impartial decision-maker.

The case involves an appeal against the ruling of the Court of Appeal delivered on 17th July, 2010, refusing the appellants application for extension of time within which to appeal against the judgement of High Court. The Supreme Court in a unanimous decision allowed the appeal. This was held in the landmark case of MR. ANTHONY ONOH VS CHIEF SUKARAT LAWAL&ORS(2023) 4 NWLR (Pt. 1873) 37 SC, where the court stated that;

“A breach of the right to fair hearing raises a fundamental issue of jurisdiction,which can be raised at any time,since any defect in jurisdiction would render the proceedings and any decision emanating therefrom a complete nullity.”

A brief of narration of what transpired in the case was that:

The appellant at the Court of Appeal,Lagos Division,by an application dated 26th January, 2010,sought for an enlargement of time within which to appeal against the judgment of the Lagos State High Court in suit No.ID/1111/92 delivered on the 27th April,2007 which said application was dismissed.

Before the said application,the appellant was sued by the respondents at the Lagos State High Court for a declaration that the respondents are entitled jointly and severally or in the alternative to certificate of occupancy (statutory of customary)to the three plots of land situate,lying and being at Okota via Isolo,Lagos State. During the course of trial,the proceedings were adjourned by the trial court on 30h March,2006 to 10 May,2006 in order to enable the parties explore moves for settlement out of court at the instance of the respondents.

Proceedings at the trial court resumed with only the respondents in court.At a stage,the trial court closed the case of the appellant and ordered counsel for the respondents to file their final written address on 17h January,2007.On 14h of February,2007,the final address of the respondents was adopted in the absence of the appellant and his counsel. The trial court delivered judgment on 27'h April,2007.The appellant became aware of the judgment in September,2008. Consequently,by a motion on notice dated 3rd November, 2008 the appellant at the Court of Appeal,Lagos Division sought for an extension of time within which to appeal against the judgment.

On 17h July,2010,the Court of Appeal considered the motion on notice and in a unanimous decision,dismissed the application and refused to grant the appellant leave to appeal against the judgment of the trial court. The appellant sought and obtained leave of the Supreme Court extending time within which to appeal against the decision of the Court of Appeal,which said leave was granted on 17th January 2012.On 15th February 2012,the appellant filed notice of appeal pursuant to the order of the Supreme Court. 

A legal question was raised on the effect of breach of fair hearing on jurisdiction of court, In it's decision the Supreme Court held that;

“A breach of the right to fair hearing raises a fundamental issue of jurisdiction,which can be raised at any time,since any defect in jurisdiction would render the proceedings and any decision emanating therefrom a complete nullity.”

A breach of the right to fair hearing can significantly impact a court's jurisdiction, often rendering its decisions null and void. This is because fair hearing is a fundamental principle of natural justice, and its absence undermines the legitimacy of any legal proceedings. When a court fails to provide a fair hearing, it essentially loses the authority to make a valid judgment on the matter. 

JUSTICE KEKERE EKUN J.S.C stated that;

“What the applicant proposed to advance at the hearing of the substantive appeal, if granted an extension of time,was non-service of hearing notice on him,which constitutes a breach of his fundamental right to fair hearing.The applicant had given good and substantial reasons for his failure to appeal within the stipulated time and had also exhibited a ground of appeal that prima facie showed good cause why the appeal should be heard.”

The Supreme Court in Kotoye V. Central Bank of Nigeria and 7 Ors [1989] 1 NWLR (Pt. 98) 419 held that;

"Fair hearing anticipated by the constitution implies that every reasonable and fair minded observer who watches the proceedings should be able to come to the conclusion that the court or other tribunal has been fair to all parties concerned.”

The Right to a Fair Hearing is guaranteed in Section 36 of the 1999 constitution. Section 36(1) provides that:

"In the determination of his civil rights and obligations, including any question or determination by or against any government or authority, a person shall be entitled to a fair hearing within a reasonable time by a court or other tribunal established by law and constituted in such a manner as to secure its independence and impartiality.”

The supreme court in it's judgement grant the appeal, and dismissed the Court of Appeal ruling that refused to grant the appllant leave to appeal against the judgement of the High Court. It further held that the High Court was wrong and misdirected itself for proceeding with the suit to judgement without affording the defendant the opportunity to conclude his defence. In delivering judgement, the court held that, the proposed ground of appeal is that having not been served with hearing notice at the trail court, the appellant was denied fair hearing. Had the application been granted, the High Court would have considered whether hearing notice was issued and served on the appellant and if not, the effect of same.Furthermore, the Supreme Court held that the High Court was wrong for non compliance with the provision of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as regards to the infringement of the appellant right to fair hearing.Thus, granting the motion on notice filed on 7/11/08 for extension of time within which to appeal against the judgement of the High Court of Lagos State. In conclusion, it was decided that fair hearing requires that the trial must be conducted according to all applicable legal rules with a view to ensuring that justice is done to all parties before the court. The law is trite that any proceedings conducted in breach of the right to fair hearing are a nullity and liable to set aside. It has also been established in the case that a breach of the right to fair hearing raises a fundamental issue of jurisdiction,which can be raised at any time,since any defect in jurisdiction would render the proceedings and any decision emanating therefrom a complete nullity.

About the Author:

Nana Hauwa’u Abdulazeez is a member of Research and Litigation Directorate, Solace Chambers, Bayero University, Kano. She can be reached via +2347039176661. Email-abdulazeeznanahauwau3@gmail.com