LEGAL PRINCIPLE: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Stay of Proceedings – Prohibition Against Creating Fait Accompli While Application Pending in Higher Court
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
A trial court must not proceed to create a fait accompli while an application challenging its jurisdiction or seeking stay of proceedings is pending before a higher court, as this renders the higher court's decision nugatory or futile.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
"What the learned trial Judge did on 9th May 1991 was to foist on the Court of Appeal a fait accompli thereby rendering it impossible for that court to arrive at a decision one way or the other on the merits of the application before it or render any decision it might take on the application nugatory or futile. The courts have always frowned on such conduct."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
This principle addresses judicial comity and the orderly administration of multi-tiered court systems. When a higher court is seized of an application seeking stay of proceedings or challenging jurisdiction, the lower court must not proceed to final determination in a manner that makes the higher court’s decision meaningless. Doing so shows disrespect for the appellate process, undermines the authority of superior courts, and potentially renders appellate remedies illusory. The prohibition is particularly strong where the lower court is aware of the pending application in the higher court. Courts must exercise restraint and await the outcome of such applications before taking irreversible steps. This principle balances the need for expeditious trial proceedings against the right to appellate remedies. While lower courts should not be paralyzed by every appeal, they must not deliberately pre-empt superior court decisions by racing to completion. Violation of this principle may constitute contempt of court or abuse of process, and judgments rendered in defiance of pending stay applications may be set aside regardless of their merits.