LEGAL PRINCIPLE: CIVIL PROCEDURE — Judgment Writing — Judgment Must Be Confined to Issues Raised by Parties
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
Judgment must be confined to the issues raised by the parties in their pleadings. It is not competent for the trial court to suo motu make a case for either party and then give judgment on that case, as this may deny fair hearing.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Iguh, JSC, in Spasco Vehicle and Plant Hire Company Limited v. Alraine (Nigeria) Limited (1995) NLC-1641989(SC) at p. 10; Paras. A–C.
"It is an elementary and fundamental principle of the determination of disputes between parties that judgment must be confined to the issues raised by the parties in their pleadings. It is not competent for the trial court suo motu to make a case for either or both of the parties and then proceed to give judgment on the case so formulated contrary to the case of the parties before him. To permit trial courts to wander out of issues raised by the parties in their pleadings and to found their judgment on such issues would not only take parties by surprise and make nonsense of pleadings, it might well result in the denial to one or the other of the parties of the right to fair hearing."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
A court’s judgment must be based solely on the issues joined by the parties. The court cannot formulate a new case for a party or decide on unpleaded issues. Doing so violates fair hearing and surprises the parties. The principle ensures that each party knows the case to meet. The court’s role is to adjudicate, not to create. The rule applies to all courts. The appellate court will set aside judgments based on unpleaded issues. The parties define the scope of litigation through their pleadings. The court cannot stray outside the pleadings.