ELECTION LAW — Arrest of Judgment — Unknown to Nigerian Law — Exception
Ratio Decidendi
Per Onnoghen, JSC, in Shettima & Ors v. Goni & Ors (Consolidated) (2011) NLC-123-332-2011(SC) at p. 14; Paras A—D:
"Apart from the peculiar nature of the proceedings giving rise to the appeal, generally speaking and by the decision of this court in Newswatch Communications Ltd vs Attah (supra) the rules of court have no provision for arrest of judgments about to be delivered by a court. There is however an exception to that general rule as can be gleaned from the decision of this court in the case of Dingyadi vs INEC (No.1) (2010) 18 NWLR (Pt.1224) 1; (2010) 4 - 7SC (pt.1) 76 where the Sokoto Division of the court of Appeal sitting on appeal in an election matter was stopped, by this court, from delivering a judgment in an appeal arising from election petition filed in abuse of process as it is the duty of every court to prevent abuse of its process or the process of the court."
Explanation / Scope
This principle establishes that arrest of judgment is generally unknown to Nigerian law, except where a court is stopped from delivering judgment in an election appeal filed in abuse of process, as every court has a duty to prevent abuse of its process. The principle applies in election matters. It ensures that abuse of process is prevented. The principle reflects the exception to the general rule. It allows courts to stop judgments in abusive proceedings. The court must exercise this power sparingly. The principle provides guidance on arrest of judgment.