LEGAL PRINCIPLE: APPELLATE PRACTICE – Issues for Determination – Grounds of Appeal Subsumed in Issues
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
I ought to stress in the first place that it is the issues distilled from all appellant's grounds of appeal that may be argued in the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court and not the grounds of appeal.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Iguh, JSC, in Oshatoba & Anor v. Olujitan & Anor (2000) NLC-331994(SC) at p. 16; Paras B–C.
"I ought to stress in the first place that it is the issues distilled from all appellant's grounds of appeal that may be argued in the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court and not the grounds of appeal."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
In appellate practice, parties argue issues for determination formulated from their grounds of appeal, not the grounds themselves. Grounds serve as the foundational basis, but issues crystallize the real questions for the court’s resolution. This promotes focused argument and efficient adjudication. However, issues must faithfully reflect the grounds from which they are derived. Arguing grounds directly—without distillation into issues—is permissible but less effective. The practice of formulating issues ensures that appeals are argued on coherent, well-defined questions rather than diffuse or repetitive grounds, enabling clearer analysis and judgment.