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!

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

Reach more audience. Place advert here.

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?

SHARE ON

extension of time, notice of appeal

FILING OF TWO NOTICES OF APPEAL IS NOT INCOMPETENT

The phrase “…after the notice of appeal” does not envisage multiple notices of appeal. There are similar provisions in the High Court and Court of Appeal Rules. In any case, it is an affront to logic and common sense to argue that an appellant can file more than one notice of appeal without indicating on which one he relies. Be that as it may, the mere fact of filing multiple notices of appeal does not render the appeal incompetent, Akuneziri v. Okenwa (2000) 12 SC (Pt. 11) 25, First Bank of Nigeria Plc. v. T.S.A. Industries Ltd. (2010) 4-7 SC (Pt. 1) 242. The 1st respondent read the appellants’ brief and made a decision to rely on one of the two notices filed within time. Not only was the 1st respondent not misled by the two notices of appeal, he did not disclose any injury he suffered for which he could seek redress. He cannot be heard to argue that another respondent elected to rely on the other notice of appeal.

— N.S. Ngwuta JSC. Yaki (Rtd) & Anor. V. Senator Bagudu & Ors. (SC.722/2015, 13 Nov 2015)

Was this dictum helpful?

IT IS NOT MANDATORY TO INCLUDE CO–ACCUSED NAME IN NOTICE OF APPEAL

In F.R.N. v. Lamido (2026) 13 NWLR (Pt. 2057) 215 at 243, A—C per Umar JSC: ‘In criminal appeals, it is generally not mandatory for an appellant to include the names of co-accused at the trial court in his notice of appeal, if those co-accused are not affected by the appeal. The fundamental principle guiding criminal appeals is that an appeal is a challenge by an aggrieved party (the appellant) against a decision of a lower court that directly affects him. The notice of appeal serves to formally notify the appellate court and the respondent, typically the State or as in this case at the lower court, the Federal Republic of Nigeria, of the appellant’s intention to appeal and the specific grounds upon which the appeal is based, pertaining to his own conviction or sentence.’

Was this dictum helpful?

IN CRIMINAL CASES, NOTICE OF APPEAL SHOULD BE FILED THIRTY DAYS AFTER JUDGEMENT DELIVERY

After hearing the appeal on the 24th November, 2022 and at the conference of the Hon. Justices on the Panel before whom the appeal was argued, it was observed that the Notice of Appeal filed on the 6th February, 2013 by the Appellant against the judgment of the Court below delivered on the 11th December, 2012, was filed out of the period of time prescribed by the provisions of Section 27 (2) (b) of the Supreme Court Act 2004 which stipulates that:- “The periods prescribed for giving of notice of appeal or notice of application for leave to appeal are:- (b) in an appeal in a criminal case, thirty days from the date of the decision appealed against.” It is clear from these provisions that the period of time within which the notice of an appeal against the decision of the Court below to this Court in a criminal matter, is limited to thirty (30) days from the date the judgment appealed against, was given or delivered by that Court. Therefore, for a notice of appeal against the decision of the Court below to this Court in a criminal matter to be properly, validly and competently be given, filed and brought before this Court, in accordance and compliance with the provisions, it must be given or filed within thirty (30) days from the date the Court below delivered the judgment in question. It follows, then, that a notice of appeal given against the decision of the Court below to this Court in a criminal case, after the expiration or outside of the period of days (30 days) prescribed and limited in the provisions, would have been given out of the statutory period of time limited for so doing, would be invalid and incompetent.

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

Was this dictum helpful?

ALL THE DEFENDANTS’ NAMES NEED NOT BE LISTED IN A NOTICE OF APPEAL BUT THAT OF THE APPELLANT

F.R.N. v. Lamido (2026) 12 NWLR (Pt. 2054) 351 at 375—376, A per Umar JSC: ‘In criminal appeals, it is generally not mandatory for an appellant to include the names of co-accused at the trial court in his notice of appeal, if those co-accused are not affected by the appeal. The fundamental principle guiding criminal appeals is that an appeal is a challenge by an aggrieved party (the appellant) against a decision of a lower court that directly affects him. The notice of appeal serves to formally notify the appellate court and the respondent, typically the state or as in this case at the lower court, the Federal Republic of Nigeria, of the appellant’s intention to appeal and the specific grounds upon which the appeal is based, pertaining to his own conviction or sentence.The primary purpose of a notice of appeal is to identify the appellant, the respondent, the decision being appealed against, and the grounds of appeal. The focus is on the appellants grievance with the judgment of the lower court as it relates to his individual case. The Court of Appeal Rules generally outline the requirements for a notice of appeal, which center on the appellant and the judgment or decision affecting him.Therefore, it is utterly unnecessary for an appellant to endorse his co-accused as part of the parties to the appeal when the appeal is for himself only. The rules do not impose a mandate on a sole appellant to include his co-accused, this is because it implies that the lower court was being invited to determine the rights or involvement of other defendants in the appeal filed there at. Conversely, if a co-accused is not appealing, or has been acquitted, or their case is entirely distinct from the appellant’s grounds of appeal, there is no legal or procedural requirement to name them in the notice of appeal. Therefore, including unaffected parties would be superfluous and could potentially complicate the appeal process by introducing irrelevant details. I agree with the contention of learned counsel for the appellant that “all appeal shall be by way of rehearing,” however, a rehearing is distinct from a re-trial. The appeal is not a re-trial of all parties involved in the original case, but rather a review of the judgment as it pertains to the specific appellant and his challenge to the findings or sentence against him.’

Was this dictum helpful?

A JOINT NOTICE OF APPEAL IS NOT PERMITTED IN CRIMINAL MATTERS

F.R.N. v. Lamido (2026) 12 NWLR (Pt. 2054) 351 at 378, H per Umar JSC: ‘From the tenor of Order 17 rules 1-5 of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2021, it is manifested, clearly, that a right of appeal in a criminal appeal, is expected to be exercised by the appellant, individually, even, where the appellant was tried along with other persons. This court in Japhet v. The State (2016) 6 NWLR (Pt.1509) 602 had maintained that the filing of a joint notice of appeal in criminal matters is not allowed … it is established that in civil matters, the appellants have the liberty: to jointly appeal, but there is restriction in criminal matters. Such joint notice of appeal in criminal matters will be incurably defective and incompetent, this is so because it will complicate the appeal and imply that the appellant is inviting the appellate court to determine the rights of the co-accused as well. A court is bound to strike out such notice of appeal even without inviting counsel to address the court on the issue. In so doing, no miscarriage of justice has been occasioned. Any appeal originated without following the rules of court is incompetent.’

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 more related dictum to show.