LEGAL PRINCIPLE: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Authority of Counsel and Withdrawal of Appeal – Requirement of Counsel-Client Relationship for Binding Acts
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
The general authority of counsel to conduct a case is predicated on the existence of a counsel-client relationship. Where there is no such relationship, an act done by a legal practitioner on behalf of a party cannot be said to be binding on that party.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Ogundare, JSC, in Attorney-General of the Federation v. A.I.C. Limited & Ors (1995) NLC-1851994(SC) at pp. 20–21; Paras A–D.
"The general authority of counsel retained to conduct a case is well spelt out... But this general authority of counsel is predicated on the existence of a counsel/client relationship. Where there is no such relationship, an act done by a legal practitioner on behalf of a party to a case cannot be said to be binding on that party."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
A legal practitioner’s act binds a client only if there is a counsel-client relationship. Without such relationship, the act is not binding. The principle protects parties from unauthorised acts. The court must verify that counsel has authority. The rule applies to withdrawal of appeals, settlements, and other significant acts. The party may repudiate unauthorised acts. The burden is on the party alleging authority to prove it. The principle ensures that parties are not bound by strangers. The court will examine the retainer. The rule promotes accountability in legal representation.
