LEGAL PRINCIPLE: APPELLATE PRACTICE – Error – When Error Warrants Interference on Appeal
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
It is not every mistake or error in a judgment that will result in the appeal being allowed. It is only when the error is substantial in that it has occasioned a miscarriage of justice that an appellate court is bound to interfere.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Iguh, JSC, in Abimbola v. Abatan (2001) NLC-2061994(SC) at p. 13; Paras C–D.
"It is not every mistake or error in a judgment that will result in the appeal being allowed. It is only when the error is substantial in that it has occasioned a miscarriage of justice that an appellate court is bound to interfere."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Not every error warrants reversal—only substantial errors that occasion a miscarriage of justice. Minor, technical, or harmless errors do not justify interference. The appellant must demonstrate that the error materially affected the outcome or denied fair hearing. The appellate court assesses whether the result would have been different without the error. If not, the appeal will be dismissed despite the presence of error. The principle prevents appeals from succeeding on technicalities where substantial justice was done. The burden is on the appellant to show prejudice. The court distinguishes between mere irregularities and fundamental errors. Harmless error doctrine applies.
