CIVIL PROCEDURE — Stay of Execution — Judicial Discretion — No One Case Is Authority for Another
Ratio Decidendi
Per Ngwuta, JSC, in Ajuwa & Anor v. SPDCN Ltd (2011) NLC-123-290-2007(SC) at p. 53; Paras A—C:
"The practice of law in matters of judicial discretion are spelt out in clear terms and that is, that since facts of two cases are not always the same, this court does not make a practice of laying down rules or principles to fetter the exercise of its discretion or of the exercise of discretion by the lower courts. Therefore, it is safe to say that in matters of discretion, no one case is authority for the other. This is because when one case is authority for another and the court bound by a previous decision in the particular way that would put an end to discretion."
Explanation / Scope
This principle establishes that in matters of judicial discretion, no case is authority for another, as facts differ, and laying down rigid rules would fetter discretion. The principle applies in discretionary matters. It ensures that discretion is exercised based on the facts. The principle reflects the flexible nature of discretion. It prevents rigid application of precedents. The court must exercise discretion independently. The principle provides guidance on judicial discretion.