NICN

It is often said and truly so that justice delayed is justice denied. The desire of every litigant when approaching the court to seek redress is that his/her cause will be heard and determined expeditiously. However, owing to several factors ranging from human to institutional, cases filed in court were heard and determined longer than expected. The National Industrial Court of Nigeria (NICN) is a specialised court which has exclusive original civil jurisdiction over labour and ancillary matters which by their nature, have to be adjudicated expeditiously. To achieve this aim, the NICN Civil Procedure Rules, 2017 has introduced the practice of trial on records. This paper while highlighting the developmental sojourn of the NICN, examines the court’s practice of ‘trial on record’ by foregrounding its merits and demerits, the challenges facing the procedure and makes recommendations towards overcoming same.

This article through desk-based methodology reviews the Court of Appeal decision in Francis Johnson &n Anor. v. Comrade Emma Eze & Anor. wherein the Court held that the National Industrial Court of Nigeria (NICN) has a nationwide territorial jurisdiction hence, the provisions of the Sheriffs and Civil Process Act (the SCPA) requiring endorsement of originating process issued in one state but to be served in another is inapplicable to processes filed at the NICN. This article while taking a historical excursion into the jurisdictional evolution of the NICN highlights the impact of the decision on the mandate and jurisdiction of the NICN as a specialized court. It argues that the decision has insulated the NICN from the shackles of technicality which is capable of arising if the NICN had been made amenable to the provision of section 97, 98 and 99 of the SCPA. It further contends that the decision is a welcomed development and same should be followed in subsequent cases in order to protect the NICN from technicalities with its concomitant adverse effects.