LEGAL PRINCIPLE: APPELLATE PRACTICE – Grounds of Appeal – Vague or General Grounds of Appeal and Defective Appellant’s Briefs Are Incompetent
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
Grounds of appeal which are vague or general in terms or which disclose no reasonable ground of appeal are incompetent and ought to be struck out; an appellant's brief must be a succinct statement of argument with issues for determination arising from and related to competent grounds of appeal filed.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
"Grounds of appeal which are vague or general in terms or which disclose no reasonable ground of appeal are incompetent and ought to be struck out. An appellant's brief must be a succinct statement of argument, with issues for determination arising from and related to the competent grounds of appeal filed."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Grounds of appeal must be specific, identifying particular errors with sufficient detail to enable response and judicial review. Vague grounds (e.g., “the judgment is against the weight of evidence”) or general complaints (e.g., “the court erred in law”) are incompetent—they fail to identify specific errors for review. Competent grounds precisely state what the trial court did wrong and why it’s erroneous. Appellant’s briefs must connect issues for determination to specific competent grounds—issues disconnected from grounds or based on incompetent grounds are improper. This requirement serves notice, focuses appellate review, and prevents fishing expeditions. Striking incompetent grounds may leave the appeal without foundation, resulting in dismissal