NewStats: 3,264,841 , 8,184,876 topics. Date: Thursday, 12 June 2025 at 02:34 PM 1q3g3u

UPDATED Rivers govt drags FG to Supreme Court over VAT

…seeks disbandment of A’Court that ordered maintenance of status quo

Rivers State, through its Attorney-General, has gone to the Supreme Court to set aside the decision of the Court of Appeal that ordered it to maintain status quo on the collection of Value Added Tax, VAT, pending the determination of an appeal that was lodged by the Federal Inland Revenue Service, FIRS.

The State, in its 10 grounds of appeal, a copy of which was sighted by Vanguard on Tuesday, is equally praying the apex court to order that the substantive appeal by the FIRS marked CA/PH/282/2021, and all other processes therein, be heard and determined by a new of the Court of Appeal.

It maintained that the three-man of Justices of the Court of Appeal led by Justice Haruna Tsammani, had in the ruling they delivered last Friday, erred in law when they relied on the provisions of Section 6(6) of the 1999 Constitution and the inherent jurisdiction of the appellate court, to order all the parties to maintain status quo on the VAT dispute.

It argued that the Court of Appeal legal lacked the powers to restore the parties to the position they were before the judgement of the Federal High Court in Port Harcourt in suit No. FHC/PH/CS/149/2020, which was delivered on August 9.

“The Learned Justices of the Court of Appeal In relying on the inherent jurisdiction of the court to make the order on the subject matter of this Appeal, failed to appreciate that the inherent jurisdiction of the court cannot be applied in contravention of statutory provisions.

“The Learned Justices of the Court of Appeal failed to appreciate the nature of inherent jurisdiction and that it cannot be invoked to circumvent the clear provisions of the statute as it was done with regards to Order 6 Rule 1 of the Court of Appeal Rules 2016 in this case”.

It argued that the appellate court failed to take into a decision of the Supreme Court in SHUGABA V. UNION BANK [1999],11 NWLR (pt. 627), page 459, to the effect “that no court has an inherent jurisdiction (except in extreme circumstances) to set aside the exercise of discretion of another court with regards to order made in respect of an application for stay of execution”.

More so, the state argued that the Court of Appeal erred in law when they wrongly assumed jurisdiction to entertain on the oral application that counsel of the FIRS made for the maintenance of status quo by parties in the dispute, in spite of the fact that condition precedent for the invocation of the inherent jurisdiction of the appellate court was not fulfilled by the 1st Respondent (FIRS).

Rivers State contended that the appellate court, by proceeding “to make a far-reaching decision”, based on the oral application by FIRS, denied its a fair hearing.

It said the , by relying on the oral application to order the maintenance of status quo, which effectively operated as a stay of execution and as an injunction against the declaratory orders of the Federal High Court, occasioned a miscarriage of justice, to its prejudice.

Consequently, it prayed the apex court to allow the appeal, set aside the decision of the court of appeal on maintenance of the status quo, and further dismiss the oral application that was made by the FIRS.

It also prayed the apex court to order that the appeal the FIRS filed against the High Court judgement that stripped it of the right to collect VAT in the state, be heard by a fresh .

Aside from the FIRS, the Attorney-General of the Federation was cited as Respondents in the appeal that Rivers State entered through its team of lawyers led by Emmanuel Ukala, SAN.

It will be recalled that the Court of Appeal in Abuja had last Friday, stopped both Rivers and Lagos States from proceeding to collect VAT in their states, pending the determination of the appeal by FIRS.

The appellate court said the order was to preserve the ‘Res’ (subject matter) of the appeal before it.

Specifically, it ordered all the parties that have subjected themselves before it to “refrain from taking any action to give effect to the judgement of the Federal High Court”, which gave Rivers State Government the right to collect VAT revenue, instead of the FIRS.

The Justice Tsammani-led made the order after it deferred the hearing of an application Lagos State filed to be ed as an interested party in the matter, till September 16.

Lagos State had through its Attorney-General, Moyosore Onibanjo, SAN, protested against the issuance of an order for the maintenance of the status quo, insisting that such order could not be binding on it, since it was yet to be ed as a party in the appeal by FIRS.

Before adjourning the der application by Lagos State for hearing, the appellate court gave both the Appellant (FIRS) and the Respondents (Rivers and AGF), two days each to file their responses.

The appellate court said it saw the need to preserve the ‘Res’ of the appeal before it, noting that “the case is of very serious national importance”.

https://www.vanguardngr.com/2021/09/breaking-rivers-govt-drags-fg-to-supreme-court-over-vat-revenue/

Ghen ghen ... Wike, a man with big hairy "steel" balls

Apart from this current case the Rivers State governor performance is below that of his predecessor Amaechi.

Employment his rating is below the previous government,
Workers promotion and Pensioner gratuity is very poor



If you are not from Rivers State and a Civil Servant don't mention me. I am from Rivers State and a civil servant and above all non partisan

ourema:
Apart from this current case the Rivers State governor performance is below that of his predecessor Amaechi.

Employment his rating is below the previous government,
Workers promotion and Pensioner gratuity is very poor

All you know to do is lament ni? Abeg say something different

I don't think we'll see any rétarded APC îmbecile on this thread

ourema:
Apart from this current case the Rivers State governor performance is below that of his predecessor Amaechi.

Employment his rating is below the previous government,
Workers promotion and Pensioner gratuity is very poor

lol apc ers, don't derail the topic

ourema:
[s]Apart from this current case the Rivers State governor performance is below that of his predecessor Amaechi.

Employment his rating is below the previous government,
Workers promotion and Pensioner gratuity is very poor[/s]

The Appeal Court ask the Rivers State Govt. And FIRS to maintain status quo, that means Rivers can keep on collecting VATs till the Appeal Court a judgement.

Good

Good

Very good

This VAT issue will most definitely set balls rolling.

It has the potential of ushering in the much coveted fiscal federalism.

Hmm. The same court presided over by Tanko Muhammad, an illiterate who only went to Islamic school? Lol.

This is a man that was specially handpicked by the FG (Fulani govt), to do their bidding. He is the reason why Bulhari is president, he is the reason why Hope Uzodimma is a governor. So, for Wike to carry ds VAT matter there...lol...excuse me for not having an iota of faith in the "supreme" court.

Prof. Yemi Oshinbajo did this same thing during his days as Lagos state AG.

It shouldn't be strange to the VP.

I see our people achieving restructuring thought the judiciary since the legislature is denying and delaying.

Restructuring is now through court process. A good academic/research materials for law and political reseachers

You want a sharia law expert who do not know the difference between technicality and the substance of a matter give you restructuring?

Praxis758:
Prof. Yemi Oshinbajo did this same thing during his days as Lagos state AG.

It shouldn't be strange to the VP.

I see our people achieving restructuring thought the judiciary since the legislature is denying and delaying.

Restructuring is now through court process. A good academic/research materials for law and political reseachers

What's the implication of taking this case to the supreme court?

Secondly, especially when the case is still at the court of Appeal?

Learned Nigerians please enlighten us.

Fuckyoumod:
What's the implication of taking this case to the supreme court?

Secondly, especially when the case is still at the court of Appeal?

Learned Nigerians please enlighten us.

Wike is overreaching himself.by asking for a new appeal ,he will definitely lose the case.he must have tried bribing them and failed

This is not Onoghen's Supreme Court that always favour the Poverty Development Party.

Rushing to Supreme Court when the matter is still pending before the appeal Court is no longer allowed in this era of Tanko Mohammed.


Wike is looking for his retirement package in form of value added tax. He just realized that VAT exists, after almost seven years in office.

DubaiLandLord1:
The Appeal Court ask the Rivers State Govt. And FIRS to maintain status quo, that means Rivers can keep on collecting VATs till the Appeal Court a judgement.

So you know more than rivers state? Were rivers state ever collecting vat?

Rivers be calm...the supreme court can't entertain you when you have an existing case in the appeal court

Wike is desperate for Money. He needs at least 200 billion of Rivers money to waste on Tambuwal for president again in 2023.


Marching Atiku's spending spree is not easy

SarkinYarki:
Rivers be calm...the supreme court can't entertain you when you have an existing case in the appeal court

Any decision made by any Judge at any time during interlocutory proceedings can be challenged at a higher court.
The Appeal Court's order that status quo be maintained is what is being challenged. They 'indirectly' want the Supreme Court to at least give a proper interpretation to that order.

Qtrpst4:
You want a sharia law expert who do not know the difference between technicality and the substance of a matter give you restructuring?

Lol........

You're not even scare that DSS can arrest you for this post.

Those demanding restructuring are being tagged criminals by Buhari while the hardened criminals in the north are being massaged.

Thanks bro

Sirjamo:
This is not Onoghen's Supreme Court that always favour the Poverty Development Party.

Rushing to Supreme Court when the matter is still pending before the appeal Court is no longer allowed in this era of Tanko Mohammed.

Wike is looking for his retirement package in form of value added tax. He just realized that VAT exists, after almost seven years in office.

It is an interlocutory appeal and a thousand Tankos can't stop it. What was frowned at was Exparte injunctions.

I don't know why you fulanis are very daft in legal matters.

SarkinYarki:
Rivers be calm...the supreme court can't entertain you when you have an existing case in the appeal court

You are an illiterate. It is an interlocutory appeal and it is routinely entertained. Go get educated and stop talking nonsense.

Terrence99:


You are an illiterate. It is an interlocutory appeal and it is routinely entertained. Go get educated and stop talking nonsense.

You clearly don't know the meaning of illiterate ...His case will be thrown out ..there status quo will be upheld .. receive sense the appeal court stay of action order was the interlocutory appeal and can't be vacated by the supreme court ...Well let Rivers lawyer eat

As a senior lawyer, this is an interlocutory appeal and will be entertained by the supreme court.

I think Wike and Rivers state are seeking the supreme court to give a clearer interpretations of the MAINTAIN A STATUS QUO.

In my opinion I think the supreme court might not favour wike and Rivers state as it lacks the power to vacate the ORDER of the Appeal court.

Wike would have just waited for the Appeal court judgement.

However, let the supreme court interpret better.

SarkinYarki:

You clearly don't know the meaning of illiterate ...His case will be thrown out ..there status quo will be upheld .. receive sense the appeal court stay of action order was the interlocutory appeal and can't be vacated by the supreme court ...Well let Rivers lawyer eat

Interlocutory appeals can flow from the Court of Appeal up to the Supreme Court. If there's a ruling on an interlocutory application and a party is dissatisfied, you can Appeal. The FIRS appealed this matter to the Court of Appeal and also got the interlocutory order. Rivers state has every right to appeal it to the Supreme Court.

Abokee, go back to the bush and stick to kidnapping travellers and schoolkids. Leave legal matters to those who are smart enough to decipher them.

Tranquill:


Any decision made by any Judge at any time during proceedings can be challenged at a higher court.
The Appeal Court's order that status quo be maintained is what is being challenged. They 'indirectly' want the Supreme Court to at least give a proper interpretation to that order.

.the supreme court will advise All parties to abide by the status quo simple and short

Hoping for the best.