APPELLATE PRACTICE — Respondents’ Notice — Validity — Distinction from Cross-Appeal
Ratio Decidendi
Per Muhammad, JSC, in Arisons Trading & Engineering Company Ltd v. The Military Governor of Ogun State & Ors (2009) NLC-123-209-1999(SC) at pp. 26-27; Paras A–C:
"A Respondent's Notice as provided by Order 3 Rule 14(2) of the Court of Appeal Rules is not and does not represent a Notice of Appeal. This is because a respondent's notice does not contemplate a situation where the applicant will be entitled to ask for a complete reversal in his favour of findings of fact made against him on certain issues contested in the case, though he may have succeeded on other issues. The respondents' notice filed in this appeal arose from the appeal on hand. I have perused the grounds upon which the respondents' Notice was predicated. I have carefully perused, compared and contrasted with the reliefs claimed in the appeal and I am contented that the respondents were neither asking for a complete reversal of the findings of fact made against them nor did they ask for anything that would have fundamentally altered the case."
Explanation / Scope
This principle distinguishes a Respondent’s Notice from a Cross-Appeal. A Respondent’s Notice does not seek complete reversal of findings or fundamental alteration of the case; it merely supports the judgment on other grounds or challenges specific findings without seeking to overturn the entire decision. It applies where a respondent wishes to contest certain findings without appealing the main decision. The principle ensures that respondents do not use a notice to mount a disguised appeal. It reflects the limited scope of a Respondent’s Notice under appellate rules. The court must examine whether the notice seeks a complete reversal. The principle provides clarity on the proper use of Respondent’s Notices.