LEGAL PRINCIPLE: APPELLATE PRACTICE — Jurisdiction — Parties to Appeal — Proper Parties Required for Appellate Jurisdiction
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
Whether a person has been properly named as a party to an appeal is determined by law, not acquiescence; an appellate court will exercise jurisdiction only over persons who are properly parties before it.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Ayoola, JSC, in A.G., Anambra State & Ors v. Okeke & Ors (2002) NLC-1021997(SC) at pp. 8–9; Paras D–B.
"Whether a person has been properly named as party to an appeal or not is not determined by acquiescence but is a matter of law determined by whether such person was a party to the proceedings, in which the decision appealed from was made; or, whether he was a person directly affected by the decision; or, was a person who, though not a party to the proceedings has been made a party by order of court. I hold that notwithstanding that the 2nd and 5th defendants did not raise the question of competence of the appeal against them in the court below, it is a point which can properly be raised on this appeal because an appellate court will exercise jurisdiction over a person who is not a party to the proceedings before it without first properly bringing him into the proceedings."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
A person is properly a party to an appeal if: (1) they were a party in the lower court; (2) they are directly affected by the decision; or (3) they have been made a party by court order. Acquiescence does not confer jurisdiction. The appellate court cannot exercise jurisdiction over a non-party. The issue can be raised for the first time on appeal. The principle protects persons from being bound by appeals to which they are not proper parties. The court will strike out appeals against improper parties. The rule ensures that only persons with a legal interest are before the court. The principle is fundamental to appellate jurisdiction.