LEGAL PRINCIPLE: APPELLATE PRACTICE – Grounds of Appeal – Sufficiency of Particulars – Ground Incorporating Error Complained of
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
Where the ground of appeal is couched or framed in such a way as to incorporate or contain particulars of error or misdirection complained of and their nature, without necessarily setting them out as usual under a separate heading of particulars, it cannot be said that the appellant has failed to supply particulars of error or misdirection in such ground.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Umaru Atu Kalgo, JSC, in Global Transport Oceanico S.A. & Anor v. Free Enterprises Nig. Ltd. (2001) NLC-128331998(SC) at p. 9; Paras A–B.
"Where the ground of appeal is couched or framed in such a way as to incorporate or contain particulars of error or misdirection complained of and their nature, without necessarily setting them out as usual under a separate heading of particulars, it cannot be said that the appellant has failed to supply particulars of error or misdirection in such ground."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
A ground of appeal may incorporate particulars of error within the ground itself, without a separate heading. If the error and its nature are clearly stated, the ground is not defective for lack of particulars. The requirement is substance, not form. The opposing party must understand the complaint. The court examines whether the ground sufficiently identifies the error. Technical non-compliance with formatting does not invalidate the ground if the complaint is clear. The principle prevents dismissal on technical grounds where the error is adequately communicated. The appellant must still comply with rules of conciseness. The court may overlook minor procedural defects. The purpose is fair notice, not formalism.
