LEGAL PRINCIPLE: APPELLATE PRACTICE — Duty of Intermediate Appellate Court — Obligation to Consider All Issues Canvassed
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
The Court of Appeal, not being the final court, had a duty to decide the merit of the case upon the issues canvassed before it, notwithstanding that it resolved the issue of jurisdiction. If reversed on jurisdiction, it would prevent the necessity of remitting the appeal to resolve other issues.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Uwaifo, JSC, in Adah v. NYSC (2004) NLC-1962000(SC) at p. 5; Paras B–D.
"The court below, not being the final court had a duty to decide the merit of the case upon the issues canvassed before it, notwithstanding that it resolved the issue of jurisdiction to the effect that the Benue State High Court lacked jurisdiction. This is because if on appeal to this court it was reversed on that issue, it would prevent the necessity of remitting the appeal to it to resolve the other issues arising from the appeal as originally made to it: see Ezeoke v. Nwagbo (1988) 1 NWLR (Pt.72) 616; Bayol v. Ahemba (1999) 10 NWLR (Pt.623) 381, (1999) 7 SCNJ 223."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Intermediate appellate courts should consider all issues, even after deciding jurisdiction. The principle applies to appellate practice. If the jurisdictional ruling is reversed, other issues are already resolved. The rule promotes judicial efficiency. The court will not leave issues undecided. The principle is well-established.