STOP SEEING INTRUSIVE ADS, & HAVE PREMIUM FEATURES? Stop seeing intrusive ads and have a smoother reading experience, once you sign up on Judicial Poetry. Sign up now!

BRIEF OF ARGUMENT TO BE FILED AFTER EXPIRATION OF TIME

Reach more audience. Place advert here.

Any brief of argument filed by a party out of time and without extension of time sought and obtained is incompetent and will not be taken but struck out at the hearing of an appeal. Where the extension of time granted has also expired, the party will still need another extension of time for revalidation or else the brief will be incompetent and liable to be struck out. See the cases of: (1) Mohammed V. Klargester (Nig.) Ltd. (1996) 1 NWLR (Pt. 422) p.54 at p.61 and (2) Goji V. Ewete (2001) 15 NWLR (Pt. 736) p.373.

— O.F. Omoleye JCA. Amaechi V. The Governor of Rivers State & Ors. (CA/PH/342/2015, 8 May 2017)

Was this dictum helpful?

SHARE ON

brief, extension of time

LACK OF RESPONDENT BRIEF DOES NOT PUT THE APPELLANT AT AN ADVANTAGE

Not filing respondents brief in no way puts the appellant at an advantage, since the judgment of the Court of Appeal is a favour of the respondent. The appellant still has to show that the Judgment of the court of Appeal was wrong.

– Rhodes-Vivour, JSC. Cameroon v. Otutuizu (2011) – SC.217/2004

Was this dictum helpful?

INELEGANCE OF BRIEF WILL NOT DEFEAT MERIT OF A CASE

However, since the introduction of brief writing way back in 1985 in the apex court, it has been the availing principle and practice that inelegance of a brief of argument should not defeat the merits of a case. Thus, as much as possible, the brief should be salvaged unless it is legally impossible to do so. See Ndukwe v The State 37 NSCQR 425 @ 484; (2009) 7 NWLR (Pt. 1139) 39; Amghare v Sylva (2009) I NWLR (Pt.1121) 1@ 53; Lawal v. Salami (2002) 2 NWLR (Pt. 752) 687: Lawal v. Oke (2001) 7 NWLR (Pt. 711) 88.

— Saulawa, JSC. Enobong v. The State (2022) – SC/CR/249/2020

Was this dictum helpful?

BRIEFS SHOULD BE CONCISE AND DEAL WITH THE ISSUES ARISING

On another look at the whole of the respondent’s brief, it can be seen that the brief is not elegantly written, besidesthis, it is very verbose and full of a lot of repetitions. The trial court’s judgment is only fourteen pages, it is from this that the respondent’s counsel wrote a brief of 62 pages. This no doubt defeats the essence of brief writing. Briefs should be concise and deal with the issues that arose from the appeal and relate to the word “Brief”. It defeats the whole intendment of brief writing if one will spend the whole day or night reading one brief. This can be excusable in a very complicated matter where there are so many appellants with many notices of appeals and also cross-appeals or where many cases are consolidated but not in this case which is a very simple matter.

— Opene JCA. United Bank for Africa (UBA) v. Samuel Igelle Ujor (CA/C/134/99, 20 FEB 2001)

Was this dictum helpful?

WHERE NO LEAVE FOR EXTENSION OF TIME IS SOUGHT, SUPREME COURT MAY STRIKE OUT CASE WITHOUT CALLING FOR ADDRESS

The above being the position of the statutory provision as interpreted, enunciated and expounded by this Court, it is now beyond arguments that a Notice of Appeal filed or given out of time is incurably and fatally incompetent such that the need to call for address from the parties on the incompetence does not arise. Because the issue goes to deprive the Court of the requisite jurisdiction to adjudicate over purported appeal brought by such a notice, it can properly and competently be raised and decided at the judgment stage by the Court without the need to revert back to the parties for a hearing, being the final appellate Court in the Country, since no amount of arguments, and matter how otherwise ingeneous, could breeze life into an already dead appeal; ab initio. See Omokuwajo v. FRN (2013) 9 NWLR (Pt. 1359) 300 at 332 (SC), NNPC V. Roven Shipping Ltd. (2019) 9 NWLR (Pt. 1676) 67 at 92 (SC), Ogar v. Igbe (2019) LPELR-48998 (SC), Oni v. Fayemi (2019) LPELR 49299 (SC), Eneyo v. Ngere (2022) LPELR-56880 (SC).

— M.L. Garba JSC. Kingsley Okoro V. The State (SC.85/2013, 17 Feb 2023)

Was this dictum helpful?

NO ORDER AS TO COST WHERE RESPONDENT FILED NO BRIEF

As the respondents filed no brief nor participated at the hearing of the appeal, I make no order as to costs. – Ogundare JSC. Iragunima v. Rivers State (2003)

Was this dictum helpful?

LEAVE FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE AN APPEAL MAY ONLY BE GRANTED UPON APPLICATION BY A PARTY

The periods of time within which to give a notice of appeal against the decision of the Court below to this Court may be extended by the Court at the instance of a person/s who intend/s to appeal to the Court in both civil and criminal cases, in deserving cases. A valid and competent Notice of Appeal can be given or filed after the expiration or outside the periods of time stipulated under the provisions of Section 27 (2) of the Act, when and only if, the periods of the time was extended by the Court, as a condition precedent. Accordingly, the prior permission or leave of the Court, by way of extension of the relevant period of time within which to give the notice of appeal, is necessary and required for the validity and competence of a notice of such an appeal to the Court. Without the prior permission first sought and obtained by an Appellant for extension of time to appeal before giving or filing a Notice of Appeal in the Court, a purported Notice of Appeal given or filed after the expiration or outside the limited period of time, would be fatally and incurably, invalid and incompetent, thereby depriving the Court of the requisite jurisdiction to entertain and adjudicate over the appeal. See Amadi v. INEC (2012) LPELR – 7831 (SC), Awhinashi v. Oteri (1984) 5 SC, 38, Enweliku v. State (1970) 1 Ail NWLR, 57, Peba v. State (1980) 8 – 11 SC, 76.

— M.L. Garba JSC. Kingsley Okoro V. The State (SC.85/2013, 17 Feb 2023)

Was this dictum helpful?

No more related dictum to show.