LEGAL PRINCIPLE: APPELLATE PRACTICE – Abandonment of Appeal – Effect of Failure to File Brief of Argument
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
When an appeal comes up for hearing and an appellant has not filed a brief of argument, it can reasonably be said that the appellant has abandoned their appeal; in such circumstances, there is no justification for the court to treat the appeal as having been argued and to give judgment in relation to it.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
"When the appeal of the respondents came up for hearing in the court below, it could reasonably be said that the 1st appellant, who had not filed a brief of argument, had abandoned his appeal. In the circumstance, there was no justification for the court below to treat the appeal of the 1st respondent as having been argued and to give judgment in relation to it."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Failure to file brief of argument by hearing date creates inference of abandonment. Briefs are essential—they: present grounds of appeal, develop arguments, identify issues for determination, and provide the basis for oral argument. Without a brief: the court doesn’t know what’s being argued, the appeal lacks foundation, and the respondent can’t prepare responses. Treating such appeal as “argued” and giving judgment on it is error because: no arguments were actually presented, the court would be deciding without knowing appellant’s case, and it denies proper appellate process. Courts facing non-brief situations should: dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution (Principle 362), strike it out for non-compliance, or adjourn with warning if there’s justifiable excuse. Courts cannot: assume what arguments would have been made, decide the appeal without knowing appellant’s case, or manufacture arguments for defaulting appellants. This principle ensures appellate process integrity—appeals require actual prosecution through proper procedures, not judicial speculation about unargued cases.