LEGAL PRINCIPLE: APPELLATE PRACTICE – Fair Hearing – Hearing of Appeal on Date Fixed for a Motion Without Notice to Parties – Nullity
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
It is thus clear that the court below, with respect, was in definite error to have heard the appeal in the present proceedings on a date specifically fixed for the hearing of a motion pending in the cause without any previous notification to the parties that the appeal would be taken on that date. In my view, the judgment of that court which was delivered upon the hearing of the substantive appeal without due notice to the parties and on a date the cause was only fixed specifically for the hearing of a motion therein filed is a violation of the fundamental right of the parties to fair hearing as entrenched in the Constitution.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Iguh, JSC, in Wema Bank Nigeria Ltd. & Ors v. Odulaja & Ors (2000) NLC-721994(SC) at p. 6; Paras C–D.
"It is thus clear that the court below, with respect, was in definite error to have heard the appeal in the present proceedings on a date specifically fixed for the hearing of a motion pending in the cause without any previous notification to the parties that the appeal would be taken on that date. In my view, the judgment of that court which was delivered upon the hearing of the substantive appeal without due notice to the parties and on a date the cause was only fixed specifically for the hearing of a motion therein filed is a violation of the fundamental right of the parties to fair hearing as entrenched in the Constitution."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Hearing a substantive appeal on a date fixed only for a motion, without prior notification that the appeal would be heard, violates constitutional fair hearing rights. The judgment is a nullity. Parties are entitled to know what matter will be heard on a given date. Listing only a motion does not reasonably notify parties that the appeal itself will be taken. This fundamental error cannot be cured. The court must strictly adhere to notice requirements. Fair hearing includes the right to adequate notice of proceedings. Any judgment delivered without such notice is void. The defect is not merely procedural but constitutional.