PRINCIPLE STATEMENT

No discretion can be regarded as judicially and judiciously exercised upon no factual disclosure or upon partial disclosure, or upon misrepresented or suppressed facts. A court exercising discretion must give reasons in justification. There can hardly be any justifiable reasons for exercising discretion upon imprecise facts.

RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)

Per Uwaifo, JSC, in General and Aviation Services Ltd v. Thahal (2004) NLC-2222000(SC) at pp. 20–21; Paras A–B.
"No discretion can be regarded as judicially and judiciously exercised upon no factual disclosure or upon partial disclosure, or upon misrepresented or suppressed facts... It is a rule of equity that where the exercise of discretion plays a part, it is expected that the court will act in conformity with the ordinary principles upon which judicial discretion is exercised otherwise an appellate court will interfere with the discretion... There is always the need for a court exercising a discretion to give reasons in justification of the exercise. There can hardly be any justifiable reasons for exercising a discretion upon imprecise facts. It is the nature and strength of facts made available to the court that provide the tonic for the proper exercise of discretion."
View Judgment

EXPLANATION / SCOPE

Judicial discretion must be exercised based on complete, accurate, and precise facts. Discretion exercised without factual disclosure, on partial disclosure, or on misrepresented or suppressed facts is not judicially exercised. The court must provide reasons justifying its discretionary decision. This serves ensuring appellate review and preventing arbitrary exercises of power. An appellate court will interfere where discretion was exercised on imprecise or incomplete facts. The court cannot hide behind discretion to make orders unsupported by the factual record; the nature and strength of facts provide the proper basis for discretion.

CASES APPLYING THIS PRINCIPLE