LEGAL PRINCIPLE: APPELLATE PRACTICE – Amendment of Grounds of Appeal – Discretion to Grant Leave – Principles Governing Exercise of Discretion
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
The discretion to grant leave to a party to amend his ground of appeal is liberally exercised in so far as an amendment can be made without injustice to the other party and is not belated as to cause undue delay in the proceedings. However, the court should not hesitate to refuse an amendment where such proposed amended ground would have, itself, been objectionable for any of the reasons for which successful objection could be raised against such ground.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Ayoola, JSC, in Shanu v. Afribank Nigeria Plc (2000) NLC-1691997(SC) at p. 4; Paras A–B.
"The discretion to grant leave to a party to amend his ground of appeal is liberally exercised in so far as an amendment can be made without injustice to the other party and is not belated as to cause undue delay in the proceedings. However, the court should not hesitate to refuse an amendment where such proposed amended ground would have, itself, been objectionable for any of the reasons for which successful objection could be raised against such ground."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Courts liberally grant leave to amend grounds of appeal where: (1) no injustice to the respondent; (2) no undue delay; (3) amendment does not introduce fundamentally new case. However, the court will refuse amendment if the proposed ground is itself objectionable—e.g., incompetent, lacking leave where required, or raising issues not properly before the court. Liberality does not extend to granting amendments that would be struck out if filed initially. The court balances the interests of justice against procedural propriety.