Limitation of Power

For a fuller understanding, it is trite that where the rules of Court or any other rules whatever have curtailed an otherwise unlimited jurisdiction of a Court and this can be by a specific statute or even the Constitution as to the subject matter or cause of action or as to the person who can bring the action, such curtailment renders the Court incompetent, stripped of its power to adjudicate over the said matter as what has happened is that such a matter is outside the confines of the power of the Court and that limitation has been done by statute or Constitution. It follows that where a Tribunal or special Court is set up to adjudicate over specialized matters, the powers of the regular Courts created under the Constitution will be ousted in respect of such specialised matters.
The Courts including the present one have held time without number that where there is a Tribunal set up as special Court under State Law such as the Delta State Local Government Law of 2004, Cap D.27, Laws of Delta State which is at the foundation of this matter at hand then the State High Court or any other Court needs to pause advisedly since it cannot just assume jurisdiction without being properly so vested. See Chief Emmanuel Osita Okereke v Alhaji Umaru Musa Yar'Adua (2008) 4 – 5 SC (Pt. 1) 206 at 238; Ajomale v Yaduat & Anor. (No 1) (2003) FWLR (Pt. 182) 1902 at 1910; Miscellaneous Offences Tribunal & Anor. v Okoroafor (2001) FWLR (Pt. 81) 1730 at 1748.

Limitation provisions, like penal provisions, take away or derogate from vested rights. They have to be construed strictly. See WILSON v. A.G, BENDEL STATE (1985) 1 NWLR (Pt.4) 572; OJO v. GOVERNOR OF OYO STATE (1989) NWLR (Pt.95) 1. The right of the respondent vested by law cannot just be set aside by the mere ipsi dixit of the appellants.