LEGAL PRINCIPLE: CONSTITUTIONAL LAW – Fair Hearing – Substance of Rule Not Technical Doctrine
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
For the rule of fair hearing is not a technical doctrine. It is one of substance. The question is not whether injustice has been done because of lack of hearing. It is whether a party entitled to be heard before deciding had in fact been given an opportunity of a hearing. Once an appellate court comes to the conclusion that the party entitled to be heard before a decision was reached but was not given the opportunity of a hearing, the order/judgment thus entered is bound to be set aside.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Onu, JSC, quoting Nnaemeka-Agu, JSC in Kotoye v. C.B.N., in Ogundoyin & Ors v. Adeyemi (2001) NLC-1231996(SC) at p. 11; Paras A–C.
"For the rule of fair hearing is not a technical doctrine. It is one of substance. The question is not whether injustice has been done because of lack of hearing. It is whether a party entitled to be heard before deciding had in fact been given an opportunity of a hearing. Once an appellate court comes to the conclusion that the party entitled to be heard before a decision was reached but was not given the opportunity of a hearing, the order/judgment thus entered is bound to be set aside."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Fair hearing is substantive, not technical. The question is not whether injustice actually occurred from lack of hearing, but whether the party was given the opportunity to be heard. If the opportunity was denied, the judgment must be set aside—regardless of whether the party would have had anything useful to say. The right to be heard is procedural; its violation is fatal even without proof of prejudice. This approach protects the integrity of the process itself. The court does not speculate on what the party might have said. Denial of opportunity alone invalidates the decision. The rule is absolute, not discretionary.