PARTIES ISSUES ARE TO BE CONSIDERED

ISSUE SIMULTANEOUSLY DISTILLED FROM BOTH A COMPETENT AND AN INCOMPETENT GROUND OF APPEAL IS DEFECTIVE – SC

Smart v. Idiokita (2026) 8 NWLR (Pt. 2044) 63 at 86, B: ‘In the circumstances, issues 2 and 3 of the appellant’s issues for determination which were distilled from grounds 3 and 5 of the notice of appeal are incompetent. It is also the law that where an issue for determination is distilled from competent and incompetent grounds of appeal, such an issue is polluted by the virus of the incompetent ground of appeal and thereby becomes incompetent and liable to be struck out. Issues 2 and 3 as distilled by the appellant are hereby struck out.’

AN APPEAL COURT CAN FORMULATE AN ISSUE – RELATEABLE TO THE GROUND OF APPEAL

From the furore of the complaints of the appellant which seem more academic than based on legal principles, it needs be restated that the Court of Appeal has a wide unfettered discretionary power to formulate its own issues in the interest of Justice, provided they relate to the grounds of appeal and flow therefrom. Stated in other words, an Appeal Court can formulate its own issues where in its opinion, the issues formulated by the parties would not justify or equitably dispose off the appeal before it. Further still, an Appeal Court can also with in the same manner, prefer or adopt the issue or issues formulated by any of the parties to an appeal where same would enable it do justice to the appeal.

– M. Peter-Odili, JSC. Makanjuola v. State (2021)

ARGUMENT IN SUPPORT OF ISSUES MUST BE TRACED TO THE ISSUES

It must be emphasised that issues for determination in an appeal must arise from the grounds of appeal filed by the appellant. Equally arising from this statement of the law is that the arguments in support of the issues must be traced to the issues and the grounds of appeal from which such issues were framed. I say no more.

— Mohammed, JSC. C.S.S. Bookshops v. Muslim Community & Ors. (2006) – SC.307/2001

WHEN IS AN ISSUE ON APPEAL EXTRANEOUS

An issue is said to be extraneous, when it was neither raised nor canvassed at the trial court on pleadings and in the evidence of the parties.

– Ogbuagu JSC. Ogundele v. Agiri (2009) – SC