LEGAL PRINCIPLE: APPELLATE PRACTICE — Interlocutory Appeals — Where Issues Are Subsumed in Substantive Appeal, Interlocutory Appeal May Be Refused
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
Where the matter on which an interlocutory appeal is brought has been overtaken by events because the trial of the substantive action has been completed and the grounds of appeal have been included in the substantive appeal, the interlocutory appeal may be refused.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Babalakin, JCA (as cited), in Nigerian Airports Authority v. Okoro (1995) NLC-971989(SC) at p. 2; Paras. B–C.
"Another important reason why this application should be refused is the fact that the matter on which the application is brought, has been overtaken by events in that the trial of the substantive action in which this interlocutory appeal arose has been completed in the lower court and counsel for the applicant informed us that he had included in his grounds of appeal in respect of that substantive case the existing grounds of appeal on which the brief of argument now sought to be filed are based."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Interlocutory appeals may become moot when the substantive trial concludes. The court may refuse to entertain an interlocutory appeal if the issues are subsumed in the substantive appeal. The principle promotes judicial efficiency. The appellant may raise the issues in the substantive appeal. The rule prevents piecemeal litigation. The court will examine whether the interlocutory issues remain live. The principle applies to all interlocutory appeals.