LEGAL PRINCIPLE: APPELLATE PRACTICE — Standard of Review — Inconsistent Decisions — Court Cannot Approbate and Reprobate
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
A court cannot affirm a decision on one hand and then make comments adverse to that same decision on the other hand. It cannot approbate and reprobate or engage in self-contradiction.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Onu, JSC, in The Governor of Oyo State v. Oba Ololade Folayan (1995) NLC-2561989(SC) at p. 54; Paras. D–A.
"The court below having rightly affirmed the refusal of the trial court to set the Aboderin Commission Report aside, any comments by the court below regarding the Press Release adverse to that report, is symptomatic of the court below blowing hot and cold at the same time. The court below should not turn round to approbate and reprobate or engage in self contradiction at the same time by saying that the Press Release which was culled from the report, was itself void."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
A court cannot take inconsistent positions in the same judgment. Affirming a decision while making adverse comments about it is self-contradictory. The principle applies to all courts. The court must be consistent in its reasoning. The rule prevents confusion and ensures clarity. The appellate court will set aside inconsistent judgments. The principle is based on logic and fairness. The court cannot blow hot and cold.