PRINCIPLE STATEMENT

A party should not be allowed to set up different cases at different stages of the proceedings, from the trial court, through the intermediate appellate court, to the final appellate court.

RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)

Per Ayoola, JSC, in Adone & Anor v. Ikebudu & Ors (2001) NLC-1401996(SC) at p. 11; Paras B–C.
"A party should not be allowed to set-up different cases at different stages of the proceedings, from the trial court, through the intermediate appellate court, to the final appellate court."
View Judgment

EXPLANATION / SCOPE

A party must be consistent in the case they present throughout all stages of litigation—trial, intermediate appeal, and final appeal. Changing the case at different stages is impermissible. The principle prevents parties from shifting positions to gain tactical advantage or to cure deficiencies in their evidence. A party cannot plead one set of facts at trial, then rely on a different set on appeal. The opposing party is entitled to know the case they must meet at each stage. Inconsistent cases undermine the integrity of the judicial process. The court will not allow a party to approbate and reprobate. The principle ensures fairness and finality.

CASES APPLYING THIS PRINCIPLE