APPELLATE PRACTICE — Grounds of Appeal — Competency — Appeal from Court of Appeal not Trial Court
Ratio Decidendi
Per Ogbuagu, JSC, in Ogunbayo v. State (2007) NLC-123-272-2005(SC) at pp. 1–2; Paras A–D:
"This Court, does not deal with an appeal against the decision of a trial court, but with that against the decision of the Court of Appeal. This is so, by virtue of the provisions of Section 233 (1) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999... In other words, it is the finding/findings of the Court of Appeal, and not that of a trial court, that is appealable to this Court."
Explanation / Scope
The principle defines the jurisdictional scope of the Supreme Court in hearing appeals. The Supreme Court is a final appellate court that hears appeals only from the Court of Appeal, not directly from trial courts. Therefore, the appellant must direct their grounds of appeal against the reasoning and findings of the Court of Appeal, not the trial court. Any ground of appeal that attacks the trial court’s findings without reference to the Court of Appeal’s decision is incompetent and will be struck out. The appellant must show how the Court of Appeal erred in its evaluation of the trial court’s decision. The principle ensures that the Supreme Court exercises its appellate jurisdiction properly and does not sit as a second court of first instance. It promotes orderly appellate procedure and finality.