Courts created by statute can have no jurisdiction but such as the statute confers. The age-old rule that a court may not in any case, even in the interest of justice, extend its jurisdiction where none exists has always worked injustice in particular cases. Parties often spend years litigating claims only to learn that their efforts and expense were wasted in a court that lacked jurisdiction. . . . Such situations inhere in the very nature of jurisdictional lines, for as our cases aptly illustrate, few jurisdictional lines can be so finely drawn as to leave no room for disagreement on close cases. Jurisdiction means adjudicatory power.
Equitable considerations are altogether irrelevant when a court lacks adjudicatory power.
If the shareholders had appealed to the House of Lords, that tribunal would have dismissed the appeal out of hand. An appeal by non-parties is no different in effect. Because this opinion overrules some of our decisions and creates a conflict among the circuits, it was circulated before release to all judges in active service. No judge favored hearing the case en banc. The appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.