Ratio Decidendi

Per Muntaka-Coomassie, JSC, in Nwadiogbu v. Anambra/Imo River Basin Development Authority & Anor (2010) NLC-123-299-2006(SC) at p. 9, paras. C–D:

"An appellate court may interfere with the exercise of judicial discretion if it is shown that there has been a wrong exercise of the judicial discretion such as where the court acts under a mis-conception of law or under mis-apprehension of fact by considering irrelevant matter."

Explanation / Scope

This principle establishes that an appellate court may interfere with the exercise of judicial discretion where it is shown that the discretion was wrongly exercised, such as where the court acted under a misconception of law, misapprehension of fact, or considered irrelevant matters. The principle applies where discretionary orders are appealed. It ensures that discretion is properly exercised. The principle reflects the grounds for appellate interference. It prevents arbitrary or erroneous exercises of discretion. The court must find an exception. The principle provides guidance on interfering with discretion.

Cases Applying This Principle