APPELLATE PRACTICE — Grounds of Appeal — Validity versus Interpretation — Distinction
Ratio Decidendi
Per Onnoghen, JSC, in Co-operative and Commerce Bank Plc & Anor v. Ekperi (2007) NLC-123-68-2002(SC) at pp. 10–11; Paras E–A:
"It is very clear that whereas an issue of the existence of a valid or binding legal mortgage questions the very existence of the origin of any legal rights or obligations arising there from, the question or issue of the rights and obligations of the parties to the legal mortgage assumes the validity of that legal mortgage but appraises or interprets its contents so as to determine what rights or obligations are conferred therein on the parties thereto."
Explanation / Scope
There is a critical distinction between challenging the validity of a document and interpreting its terms. A challenge to validity attacks the existence of the document as a source of legal rights. Interpretation assumes the document is valid and seeks to ascertain the rights and obligations it creates. This distinction affects the nature of the grounds of appeal and the reliefs available.