CONSTITUTIONAL LAW ā Fair Hearing ā Consideration of Reply Brief ā Non-Consideration Not Breach Where Brief Does Not Meet Rule Requirements
Principle Statement
The above constitutional provision does not impose upon a court the duty to deal with the same arguments over and over, and allow unnecessary repetitions to weigh it down. In other words, the doctrine of fair hearing does not extend to over stretching the court with unnecessary arguments that are not allowed by law.
Ratio Decidendi (Source)
Per Mukhtar, JSC, in Basinco Motors Limited v. Woermann-Line (2009) NLC-123-24-2003(SC) at p. 28; Paras CāE.
"The above constitutional provision does not impose upon a court the duty to deal with the same arguments over and over, and allow unnecessary repetitions to weigh it down. In other words, the doctrine of fair hearing does not extend to over stretching the court with unnecessary arguments that are not allowed by law."
Explanation / Scope
This principle establishes that the court is not required to consider a reply brief that does not meet the requirements of the rules. The doctrine of fair hearing does not require the court to deal with repetitive or unnecessary arguments. The principle applies where reply briefs are used improperly. It ensures that courts are not burdened with unnecessary arguments. The principle reflects procedural efficiency. It prevents abuse of the right to reply. The court must determine whether the reply brief raises new issues. The principle ensures that constitutional guarantees are not used to overstretch the court.
