LEGAL PRINCIPLE: APPELLATE PRACTICE – Person Who May Exercise Right of Appeal – Party Adversely Affected by Decision
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
The existence of a decision affecting a party is a condition precedent to the existence of a right of appeal and indeed the exercise of any such right of appeal by that party. The right of appeal conferred by the Constitution is a right against the decision of a court adversely affecting a party. It therefore goes without any argument that for a person to claim any right of appeal as envisaged, that person must show that the decision of the court is against him or against his interest.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Katsina-Alu, JSC, in Ogunkunle & Ors v. Eternal Sacred Order of the Cherubim and Seraphim & Ors (2001) NLC-1921997(SC) at p. 7; Paras A–B.
"The existence of a decision affecting a party is a condition precedent to the existence of a right of appeal and indeed the exercise of any such right of appeal by that party. The right of appeal conferred by the Constitution is a right against the decision of a court adversely affecting a party. It therefore goes without any argument that for a person to claim any right of appeal as envisaged, that person must show that the decision of the court is against him or against his interest."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
The constitutional right of appeal exists only against a decision that adversely affects a party. A person cannot appeal a decision that does not affect their interest or that is in their favour. The existence of a decision affecting the party is a condition precedent to the right of appeal. The prospective appellant must demonstrate that the court’s decision is against them or their interest. This prevents appeals by parties with no stake in the outcome or who suffered no grievance. The right is remedial—to correct errors causing prejudice. Without adverse effect, there is no standing to appeal. The requirement ensures judicial resources are not wasted on appeals by unaffected parties.