THE STATE AND FEDERAL HIGH COURTS’ JURISDICTION OVER BANKER-CUSTOMER DISPUTE FROM THE PRISM OF DECIDED CASES: WHITHER THE MAGISTRATE COURT’S JURISDICTION
THE STATE AND FEDERAL HIGH COURTS’ JURISDICTION OVER BANKER-CUSTOMER DISPUTE FROM THE PRISM OF DECIDED CASES: WHITHER THE MAGISTRATE COURT’S JURISDICTION

Summary/Abstract: The Magistrate Court Law of most States in Nigeria, (including Oyo State) gives them jurisdiction over tortious acts of which detinue is one. Thus, where a bank customer, mistakenly makes an intra or interbank transfers to a wrong account whereof the money is withheld by the bank, and the withheld amount is within the monetary jurisdiction of the Magistrate Court, the customer, usually brings an action in detinue for the bank to release the money to him/her. This is usually done notwithstanding that both the Supreme Court of Nigeria (SCN) and Court of Appeal (CA) have held that the State and Federal High Courts’ have concurrent jurisdiction over banker-customer disputes. This paper, adopts desk-based method in interrogating the jurisdiction of the Magistrate Court of Oyo State under the Oyo State Magistrate Court Law, 2011 vis-à-vis the jurisdiction of the State and Federal High Courts over banker-customer dispute based on decided cases to determine whether there is any conflict. It argues that the cases in which the SCN and CA have held that the State and Federal High Courts have and exercises concurrent jurisdiction over banker-customer disputes, were decided without reference to the jurisdiction of other equally competent courts including the Magistrate Court of Oyo State (and other States as well). It found that there is not jurisdictional conflict between these courts in relation to banker-customer disputes but symbiotic. The paper makes vital recommendations before concluding.

• Details
• Contents