LEGAL PRINCIPLE: APPELLATE PRACTICE — Stay of Execution — Conditional Stay — Applicant Seeking Variation Must Suggest Terms or Show Inability to Meet Conditions
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
An applicant seeking a variation of a conditional stay must suggest alternative terms or show reasons why he cannot meet the prescribed conditions, such as by filing an affidavit of means.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Kutigi, JSC, in Olunloyo v. Adeniran (2001) NLC-891999(SC) at p. 8; Paras A–B.
"The applicant who wanted a variation of the conditional stay granted to him by the trial court, did not find it worthwhile to suggest any other term or condition. He did not also give reasons why he cannot meet the conditions prescribed as he completely failed or refused to file any affidavit of means."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
When a conditional stay is granted, the applicant seeking variation must propose alternative terms or demonstrate inability to meet the conditions. The applicant should file an affidavit of means to show financial incapacity. Mere assertion of inability is insufficient. The court cannot speculate on what terms would be appropriate. The burden is on the applicant to provide evidence. The principle prevents applicants from complaining about conditions without offering alternatives. The court may consider the applicant’s failure to propose terms as a factor against variation. The rule ensures that stay applications are handled efficiently. The applicant must cooperate with the court. The principle applies to both trial and appellate courts.
