LEGAL PRINCIPLE: CIVIL PROCEDURE – Relief – Court Cannot Grant Relief Not Sought
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
The principle is well established in law that a court must not grant to a party a relief which they have not sought or which is more than they have sought.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
"The principle is also well established in law that a court must not grant to a party a relief which he has not sought or which is more than he has sought."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Courts are bound by parties’ claims—they cannot grant: (1) Relief not sought—remedies the party didn’t request; (2) Relief exceeding what’s sought—more than claimed (higher damages, broader injunctions, additional orders). This limitation serves: party autonomy (parties control their claims), fair notice (defendants know what’s claimed against them), and adversarial system integrity (courts resolve parties’ disputes, not impose courts’ preferred outcomes). Examples of improper relief: plaintiff claims N100,000 damages, court awards N150,000; plaintiff seeks declaration, court grants injunction not requested; plaintiff claims specific performance, court awards damages instead. However, courts can: grant lesser relief (included in greater), grant alternative remedies within the same category if sought generally, or reformulate relief granting the substance of what’s sought. The principle prevents judicial overreach—courts respond to parties’ requests, not create their own remedies. Parties wanting specific relief must explicitly claim it; implicit or hoped-for relief cannot be granted.