PRINCIPLE STATEMENT

Waiting for the outcome of another appeal in the hope that it would succeed is like taking a gamble and shows neither diligence nor competence; it is not a good reason for delay in filing an appeal.

RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)

Per Uwais, JSC, in Kotoye v. Saraki & Anor (1995) NLC-2121994(SC) at pp. 7–8; Paras. E–A.
"The only reason given, by the defendant/applicant, in this application is that learned counsel for the applicant... had reasonable expectation that the appeal in that case to this court would succeed. This to me is like taking a gamble. With respect, it shows neither diligence nor competence..."
View Judgment

EXPLANATION / SCOPE

Gambling on the outcome of another appeal is not a good reason for delay. The applicant must act diligently. The principle applies to all applications for extension of time. The court will not reward speculative delay. The applicant must show a genuine reason for the delay. The rule promotes timely filing of appeals. The applicant cannot rely on uncertain future events. The court will examine the reasonableness of the explanation.

CASES APPLYING THIS PRINCIPLE