LEGAL PRINCIPLE: APPELLATE PRACTICE — Right of Appeal — Party Not Affected by Decision — No Right of Appeal
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
A person who is not affected by a decision has no right to appeal against it; there must be something in the judgment that interferes with his legal rights or puts him into jeopardy.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Iguh, JSC, in A.G., Anambra State & Ors v. Okeke & Ors (2002) NLC-1021997(SC) at pp. 22–23; Paras E–A.
"There can be no doubt that the appeal of the 1st defendant is patently baseless and misconceived. He was neither adjudged a contemnor by the court below nor was he, whether directly or indirectly, convicted or pronounced guilty for the alleged contempt nor was he sentenced or committed to prison as was the case with the 2nd-6th defendants. There was nothing in the entire judgment of the court below which in any way interfered with his legal rights and no aspect of the judgment of that court exposed or put him into any jeopardy whatsoever. It seems to me that the 1st defendant had no reason whatever to appeal against the said judgment of the court below."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Only a party adversely affected by a decision has the right to appeal. A person who is not affected, not adjudged a contemnor, not convicted, not sentenced, and whose legal rights are not interfered with has no standing to appeal. The principle prevents frivolous appeals by persons without a stake in the outcome. The appellant must show that the judgment affects his legal rights or exposes him to jeopardy. The rule is based on the constitutional right of appeal being against a decision adversely affecting the appellant. The court will strike out appeals by non-affected parties. The principle promotes judicial efficiency.