CIVIL PROCEDURE — Substitution of Parties — Death of Appellant — Substitution in Representative Capacity
Ratio Decidendi
Per Ngwuta, JSC, in Arowolo v. Olowookere & Ors (2011) NLC-123-200-2003(SC) at pp. 28—29; Paras E—A:
"The 1st Respondent raised a preliminary objection in his brief. He argued that the appeal is incompetent as it does not survive the original appellant, Alhaji Jimoh Arowolo. He relied on the ruling of Tabai, JSC on 14/7/2006, in which His Lordship granted liberty to the Respondent to raise the issue in the main appeal. My learned brother, Adekeye, JSC having reviewed the argument on both sides, saw the objection 'as not only frivolous but also time wasting, in other words, an abuse of the process of this Court'. I cannot agree more with that assessment. Now, raising the issue again in his brief the respondent is asking the Court to sit on appeal and set aside its ruling of 14/7/2006. This, the Court cannot do, notwithstanding the rider in the ruling of my Lord Tabai, JSC on the motion for substitution."
Explanation / Scope
This principle establishes that a party cannot ask the Supreme Court to sit on appeal over its own ruling granting substitution, even where liberty was granted to raise the issue later. The principle applies where substitution is challenged. It ensures that the court’s ruling on substitution is final. The principle reflects the finality of interlocutory rulings. It prevents abuse of process. The court must reject such objections. The principle provides guidance on substitution of parties.