LEGAL PRINCIPLE: APPELLATE PRACTICE — Issues for Determination — Duty of Court to Consider All Issues — Exception Where Issues Are Subsumed
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
When a party submits an issue for determination, the court must make a pronouncement on that issue except where the issue is subsumed in another issue. An appellate court may not consider all issues if the only issue considered is not raised in the alternative but cumulatively, and its consideration makes it unnecessary to consider other issues.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Edozie, JSC, in Okotie-Eboh v. Manager & Ors (2004) NLC-1972003(SC) at pp. 15–16; Paras E–A.
"The case of Obi Nwanze Okonji and 4 Ors. v. George Njokanma and 2 Ors. (1991) 7 NWLR (Pt. 202) 131 and 146 is authority for the view that when a party submits an issue for determination, the court must make a pronouncement on that issue except where the issue is subsumed in another issue. … In the case of Alhaji Oladoja Sanusi v. Oreitan Ishola Amoyegun (1992) 4 NWLR (Pt. 237) 527 at 550–551, this court opined that an appellate court may not consider all the issues raised before it by parties if the only issue considered by the appellate court is not raised in the alternative but cumulatively with other issues and the consideration of that issue makes it unnecessary for other issues raised to be considered."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Courts must pronounce on issues submitted unless subsumed. The principle applies to appellate practice. Where one issue is dispositive, others need not be considered. The rule promotes judicial efficiency. The court will not consider alternative issues unnecessarily. The principle is well-established.