LEGAL PRINCIPLE: APPELLATE PRACTICE – Extension of Time – Principles Governing Grant of Extension of Time to Appeal
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
Before an application of this kind could succeed, the applicant must satisfy the Court that there are good and satisfactory reasons for not filing his application timeously. It must also be shown that the applicant has good, substantial and arguable grounds of appeal. It is settled that for this court to exercise its discretionary power, an application of this sort must be supported by an affidavit which must give sufficient reasons to explain the delay, the judgment or ruling of the court below against which he is seeking to appeal, and the proposed grounds of appeal against the said judgment or ruling.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Ejiwunmi, JSC, in Central Bank of Nigeria v. Ahmed & Ors (2001) NLC-92001(SC) at p. 19; Paras A–B.
"Before an application of this kind could succeed, the applicant must satisfy the Court that there are good and satisfactory reasons for not filing his application timeously. It must also be shown that the applicant has good, substantial and arguable grounds of appeal. It is settled that for this court to exercise its discretionary power, an application of this sort must be supported by an affidavit which must give sufficient reasons to explain the delay, the judgment or ruling of the court below against which he is seeking to appeal, and the proposed grounds of appeal against the said judgment or ruling."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Extension of time to appeal requires two conditions: (1) good and satisfactory reasons for delay; (2) good, substantial, and arguable grounds of appeal. The application must be supported by an affidavit explaining the delay, attaching the judgment appealed against, and setting out proposed grounds of appeal. The discretion is judicial, not arbitrary. Delay must be explained—mere oversight or ignorance may not suffice. Grounds must be arguable, not necessarily certain to succeed. The court balances the need for finality with justice to the appellant. The applicant bears the burden of satisfying both conditions. Failure on either condition defeats the application. The court examines each case on its merits.
