LEGAL PRINCIPLE: CIVIL PROCEDURE – Judgment Writing – Error in Judicial Approach – When Error Occasions Miscarriage of Justice
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
The procedure adopted by the learned trial Judge is at best a technical error which is not substantial and it did not lead to miscarriage of justice in the sense that the decision or the outcome of the proceedings is not prejudicial or inconsistent with substantial rights of the parties.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Ogwuegbu, JSC, in Jekpe & Anor v. Alokwe & Ors (2002) NLC-1111995(SC) at p. 13; Paras A–B.
"The procedure adopted by the learned trial Judge is at best a technical error which is not substantial and it did not lead to miscarriage of justice in the sense that the decision or the outcome of the proceedings is not prejudicial or inconsistent with substantial rights of the parties."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Not every error in judicial approach warrants reversal—only substantial errors that occasion miscarriage of justice. Technical or procedural errors that do not prejudice parties or affect substantial rights are harmless. The appellate court assesses whether the error materially affected the outcome or denied fair hearing. If the decision would have been the same regardless, reversal is not required. The principle prevents appeals on technicalities where substantial justice was done. The appellant must demonstrate prejudice, not merely irregularity. The court balances procedural compliance with substantive justice. Harmless error doctrine applies. The burden is on the appellant to show miscarriage of justice.
