APPELLATE PRACTICE — Duty of Intermediate Appellate Court — Consideration of All Issues Properly Placed Before the Court
Ratio Decidendi
Per Ogwuegbu, JSC (as adopted by Muntaka-Coomassie, JSC), in Uzuda & Ors v. Ebigah & Ors (2009) NLC-123-348-2002(SC) at pp. 19-20; Paras A-C:
"The Court of Appeal being an intermediate appellate court, its decisions do not enjoy the finality as those of Supreme Court by virtue of Section 235 of the constitution. Whereas the Supreme Court can determine an appeal on one of the issues submitted to it in an appeal, the Court of Appeal cannot afford to ignore other issues properly placed before it since its decision on one or some of the issues may be faulted on a further appeal to this court. Where, however, an intermediate appellate court rests its decision on one of the issues, it should also express its views and pronounce on the other issues identified for its determination. Even where the intermediate court is of the settled view that the sole issue on which its decision is anchored will be upheld by the Supreme Court, it is prudent to express an alternative view."
Explanation / Scope
This principle establishes that an intermediate appellate court (Court of Appeal) must consider all issues properly placed before it. Unlike the Supreme Court, which can determine an appeal on one issue, the Court of Appeal cannot ignore other issues since its decision may be appealed. It should express views on all issues and, where possible, express alternative views. The principle applies in all appeals before the Court of Appeal. It ensures comprehensive adjudication. The principle reflects the need for finality and completeness. It prevents the Supreme Court from being deprived of guidance. The principle provides guidance on the duty of intermediate appellate courts.