LEGAL PRINCIPLE: APPELLATE PRACTICE — Grounds of Appeal — Duty of Appellate Court to Consider Proper Grounds
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
An appellate court errs when it attributes grounds of appeal from one party to another and rejects the proper grounds. A decision based on wrongly attributed grounds is in a confused state and cannot stand.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Uwais, CJN, in Ogunsola v. NICN (1995) NLC-241992(SC) at p. 12; Paras. A–C.
"It is very clear that in determining the appeal before it, the Court of Appeal was in serious error to have attributed the grounds of appeal in respect of the respondent's interlocutory appeal to the appellant. The error was compounded when the court rejected the issues formulated in the appellant's brief of argument and it decided to determine the appeal on the grounds of appeal wrongly attributed to the appellant. The error is obvious. Not only that, the decision, which is meant to be based on the grounds of appeal considered by the lower court, is inconsistent with what the respondent's grounds of appeal alleged. In the circumstances, the judgment of the lower court is in a confused state."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
An appellate court must correctly identify which grounds belong to which party. Attributing grounds to the wrong party and rejecting proper grounds is a serious error. The resulting decision is confused and inconsistent. The principle ensures that each party’s appeal is considered on its own grounds. The court cannot conflate separate appeals. The rule applies to all appellate courts. The affected party is entitled to have its appeal determined on its proper grounds. The appellate court must carefully examine the notice of appeal. The decision may be set aside for procedural irregularity.