LEGAL PRINCIPLE: APPELLATE PRACTICE — Ground of Appeal — Particulars — Role in Determining Nature of Ground
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
Order 8 Rule 2(2) of the Supreme Court Rules requires that if grounds allege misdirection or error in law, the particulars and nature of the misdirection must be clearly stated; this provides a key to determining the nature of the ground.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Obaseki, JSC, in Metal Construction (West Africa) Ltd v. Migliore (1990) NLC-2511985(SC) at p. 29; Paras A–C.
"Order 8 Rule 2(2) of the Supreme Court Rules 1985 provides that 'If the grounds of appeal allege misdirections or error in law, the particulars and the nature of the misdirection or error shall be clearly stated.' This provides a key or guide to the determination of the nature of the ground or the nature of the questions involved in the ground. The classification of the ground as a ground of law can only give competence to an appeal without leave if the nature of the misdirection or error in law clearly stated in the particulars bears out the category assigned."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
The particulars of a ground of appeal are key to determining its nature. If a ground alleges error in law, the particulars must clearly state the nature of the misdirection. The classification as a ground of law is only effective if the particulars bear out that category. Vague or insufficient particulars may lead to the ground being treated as mixed or factual. The court examines whether the particulars actually show a misunderstanding or misapplication of law, not just a label. The rule ensures that parties cannot claim a ground is of law without substantiating it. The particulars must be precise and informative. The court will strike out grounds with inadequate particulars.
