LawPavilion Electronic Law ...

conditions to be fulfilled before a suit can be
instituted against NICON in no way constitutes
a denial of the right of access to the court of
anymore wishing to sue NICON. Section 26(2)
of the NICON Act which states the conditions
to be fulfilled before a suit is filed against
NICON PLC is not unconstitutional or
inconsistent with 6(6)(b) of the Constitution.
See: Gambari v. Gambari 1990 5 NWLR
pt.152 p.572 Obada v. M. G. of Kwara State
1994 4 NWLR pt.336 p.26 Section 26(2) of
the NICON Act is a condition precedent for the
institution of a suit against NICON PLC.
Judicial powers exercisable by the courts
under Section 6(6)(b) of the Constitution are
limited to conditions precedent. Once, as in
this case, legislation (NICON Act) provides for
a condition precedent before a court has
jurisdiction, that condition must be fulfilled
subject to recognized exceptions. The suit
would be incompetent if the court does not
ensure that there is compliance with the
condition precedent. See: Madukolu v.
Nkemdilim 1962 2 SCNLR p.341 There is no
dispute, and the Record of Appeal is clear on
the point that the appellant did not serve the
respondent a pre-action Notice. The issue is
whether the appellant ought to have served
the appellant a pre-action Notice. Section
26(1) and (2) of the NICON Act States that:
(1) Notwithstanding anything in any other
enactment, no suit against the Corporation, a