In answer to the new plea in law raised, the Plaintiffs submitted that since the
defendants have raised the issue of jurisdiction, they cannot bring the present
application or raise new issues until the question of jurisdiction is disposed of
unless they first withdraw their objection based on jurisdiction. It is worthy to
mention that the Plaintiffs, despite the close of pleadings, continued to bring
frivolous applications which are in most cases repetitions and thus not relevant
for the determination of the present suit.
4. ANALYSIS OF THE ISSUES FOR DETERMINATION AND LEGAL
ARGUMENTS OF THE PARTIES.
From the facts of the case and the arguments of the parties, it is deducible that
it raises pertinent preliminary questions of jurisdiction, admissibility and the
merits of the case. It is trite law that when in an action before a Court, the
jurisdiction to entertain the suit is questioned, the objection has to be disposed
of first before delving into the merits.
In other words, a Court or other tribunal seised with a case must determine its
competence to entertain the suit before discussing the merits of the case.
Jurisdiction is the foundation for the exercise of the judicial power of a Court or
tribunal. Where there is lack of jurisdiction, a decision on the merits will
tantamount to an exercise in futility because you cannot place something on
nothing and expect it to stand.
9