LEGAL PRINCIPLE: APPELLATE PRACTICE — Findings of Fact — Challenge on Appeal — Effect of Not Appealing Specific Finding
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
A party who has not appealed against a specific finding of the trial court or Court of Appeal cannot be heard to question that finding on appeal.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Ogundare, JSC, quoting Onu, JSC in Ogunbiyi v. Ishola (1996) 6 NWLR (Pt.452) 12 at p. 23, in Sparkling Breweries Limited & Ors v. Union Bank of Nigeria Limited (2001) NLC-1131996(SC) at p. 20; Paras D–A.
"Be it noted that where a party has not appealed against a finding of the trial court or the Court of Appeal, he cannot be heard to question that finding on appeal. See Ijale v. Leventis & Co. Ltd. (1959) SCNLR 255; (1959) 4 FSC 108, the essence of an appeal being, to have an opportunity to have one's suit re-examined before a higher or independent panel with a view to convincing such a panel in its favour."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
An unchallenged finding of fact is binding on the appellant. The appellant must file a ground of appeal against any finding they wish to challenge. Failure to do so means the finding remains conclusive. The essence of appeal is to re-examine issues properly raised. The court will not entertain arguments against findings not specifically appealed. The principle applies to both trial and appellate court findings. The appellant cannot complain about a finding if they did not include it in the notice of appeal. The rule promotes finality and ensures that the respondent knows the case they must meet. The appellant must identify each error complained of.
