LEGAL PRINCIPLE: APPELLATE PRACTICE – Grounds of Appeal – What Constitutes Ground of Law – Guidelines for Distinction
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
A ground of law reveals a misunderstanding or misapplication of the law to proved or admitted facts; a ground of mixed law and fact questions the evaluation of facts before applying the law; a pure fact ground is easier to determine.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Ogundare, JSC (quoting Eso, JSC in Ogbechie v. Onochie), in Orakosim & Ors v. Menkiti (2001) NLC-811995(SC) at pp. 8–9; Paras E–A.
"There is no doubt that it is always difficult to distinguish a ground of law from a ground of fact but what is required is to examine thoroughly the ground of appeal in the case concerned to see whether the grounds reveal a misunderstanding by the lower tribunal of the law or a misapplication of the law to the facts already proved or admitted in which case it would be question of law, or one that would require questioning the evaluation of facts by the lower tribunal before the application of the law in which case it would amount to question of mixed law and fact. The issue of pure fact is easier to determine."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
A ground of law alleges that the lower court misunderstood the law or misapplied it to proved or admitted facts. A ground of mixed law and fact challenges the evaluation of facts before applying the law—requiring re-examination of evidence. A pure fact ground challenges the findings of fact without involving legal principles. The distinction determines whether leave to appeal is required. The court examines the ground thoroughly, considering whether it questions legal principle or factual assessment. The classification is not always easy, but the guideline helps. Pure fact grounds and mixed grounds require leave; pure law grounds do not.
