LEGAL PRINCIPLE: APPELLATE PRACTICE — Standard of Review — Appellate Court — Should Not Make Comments on Merits of Substantive Case
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
An appellate court should not make pronouncements on the merits or otherwise of the substantive case when determining an interlocutory application. Such comments are discouraged and may be frowned upon by the Supreme Court.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Ogwuegbu, JSC, in Oduntan v. General Oil Limited (1995) NLC-731992(SC) at p. 9; Paras. A–C.
"The court below made pronouncements on the merits or otherwise of the case. It ought not have done so and this court had frowned at such comments in many of its decisions. That notwithstanding, the comments did not touch on the merits of the application."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
An appellate court should avoid making comments on the substantive merits when ruling on interlocutory applications. Such comments may prejudice the final trial. The principle applies to all appellate courts. The court must confine itself to the issues in the interlocutory application. The rule prevents prejudgment of the substantive case. The court may be reversed if it makes inappropriate comments. The principle promotes fairness and impartiality. The appellate court should focus on procedural issues.