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!

PRINCIPLES THAT GUIDE WHETHER A GROUND OF APPEAL IS INCOMPETENT

Reach more audience. Place advert here.

The principle to guide the court in deciding whether a ground of appeal is incompetent is as laid down in the case of Aderounmu v. Olowu (supra) at pages 265 – 266 which has been cited and relied upon by both counsel in this appeal. In that case, Ayoola JSC stated the law, inter alia , as follows: “… what is important in a ground of appeal and the test the court should apply is whether or not the impugned grounds show clearly what is complained of as error in law and what is complained of as misdirection or as the case may be, error of fact . The view, with which I am inclined to agree, is expressed in the Court of Appeal. See the case of Nteogwuija and Ors. v. Ikuru and Ors. (1998) 10 NWLR (Pt. 569) 267 at 310, that the mere fact that a ground of appeal is framed as an error and misdirection does not make it incompetent. In my view, only general propositions can be made in a matter in which the question is not as to form. Ultimately, it is for the court before which the question is raised to decide whether viewed objectively, the ground satisfies the requirements of preciseness and clarity … what makes a ground incompetent is not whether it is framed as an error and a misdirection but whether by so stating it, the other side is left in doubt and without adequate information as to what the complaint of the appellants actually is.”

— Onnoghen JSC. Aigbobahi & Ors. v. Aifuwa, Osabuohien & Ors. (SC. 194/2001, 3 Feb 2006)

Was this dictum helpful?

SHARE ON

grounds of appeal

SPECIFIC ISSUES CANNOT BE RAISED FROM AN OMNIBUS GROUND OF APPEAL

Dabo v. C.O.P.,Taraba State (2026) 7 NWLR (Pt. 2043) 577 at 590 — 591, D — F: ‘The rule on omnibus ground notwithstanding, an appellant who has specific issues on facts and law cannot ride on the wings of indolence in anchoring his appeal solely on the omnibus ground. In the case of Akinlagun & Ors. v. Oshoboja (2006) LPELR – 348(SC); (2006) 12 NWLR (Pt.993) 60, this court held that: “An omnibus ground of appeal is a general ground of fact complaining against the totality of the evidence adduced at the trial. It is not against a specific finding of fact or any document. It cannot be used to raise any issue of law or error in law. See Ajibona v. Kolawole (1996) 1 NWLR (Pt. 476) 22.”

Similarly, in the case of Saraki v. Kotoye (1990) LPELR -15503 (SC); (1990) 4 NWLR (Pt. 143) 144, this court held that “The ground which complains that the decision, cannot be supported having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case before the court is complete in itself. It is not vague and does not require particulars. It does not require particulars because the particulars or error are implicit; in the allegation of disregard to the facts and circumstances of the case before the court.“ Since the ground has no particulars, there is nothing specific to be raised separately. In the instant case, the notice of appeal to the lower court, is at pages 68 to 70 of the record of appeal. The sale ground of appeal is the omnibus ground. It was couched as follows: Ground of Appeal: The decision of the trial court is against the weight of evidence and upon receipt of the records of appeal, the appellants shall file and serve more grounds of appeal and their particulars. Then, the relief is at page 69 of the same record and it reads: “Reliefs sought from the court: 1. An order of this honourable court allowing the appeal and setting aside the judgment of the trial court awarding damages of N5,000,000 (FiveMillion Naira Only) against the appellant“. The relief sought from the court was specific. There, the appellant was praying for the judgment of the trial court awarding damages of N5,000,000 to be set aside. This is what the appellant before us is contending with before this court. It is obvious here that the appellants’ complaint, or what the appellants wanted to redress is the damages of N5,000,000. There is no ground of appeal before the lower court dealing with the specific fact or issue of the said damages. It is trite law that an appeal court dealing with the omnibus ground is limited to the appraisal of the total evidence and not on a finding or non-finding of a specific factor issue. Specific issues can only be raised by a substantive ground of appeal. See the case of Osolu v. Osolu (2003) LPELR – 2810(SC); (2003) 11 NWLR (Pt.832) 608. It follows therefore, that you cannot use omnibus ground to attack a specific finding in a case. In the instant case, the appellants in the notice of appeal filed at the lower court indicated expressly that the part of the decision he complained of was the award of N5,000,000 (Five Million Naira) damages but he failed to raise any ground of appeal to attack that specific issue of damages. The only ground of appeal they filed was the omnibus ground and they indicated that “upon the receipt of the records of appeal, the appellants shall file and serve more grounds of appeal and their particulars”. This, the appellants failed to do.’

Was this dictum helpful?

ISSUE NOT TIED TO A GROUND OF APPEAL IS OF NO MOMENT

Issue 1 was formulated from ground 1 while Issue 2 does not flow from any of the seven grounds of Appeal. No Issue or Issues were formulated or argued in respect of grounds 2-7 of his Notice of Appeal. A fortiori, the Appellant appears to have abandoned grounds 2-7 of his Notice of Appeal. In the same vein, Issue No. 2 is not tied to any ground of Appeal and therefore is of no moment. See Yadis Nigeria Ltd v. Great Nigeria Insurance Coy Ltd (2007) 30 NSQR (Pt. 1) page 495.

— P.O. Elechi, JCA. Onoeyo v UBN (2014) – CA/C/66/2007

Was this dictum helpful?

ONLY ONE ISSUE CAN ARISE FROM A GROUND OF APPEAL

It should, however, be noted that, Appellant had distilled their Issue one from grounds 1, 2 and 5 of the Grounds of the Appeal, and thereafter, distilled the Issue 3 (which the Respondent attacked, mistaking it for Issue 4) from the same ground one of the appeal. Appellants cannot do that, as it would amount to proliferation of issues. Having earlier used the ground one, together with grounds 2 and 5, to distill the issue one, the said ground one was no longer available to donate another issue for the determination of the appeal. We have held repeatedly, that a ground of appeal cannot be split to generate issues for determination, and that, once an issue has been distilled from a given ground of appeal, the said ground of appeal is no longer available to give birth to another issue for determination, either alone or in conjunction with other grounds of appeal. Where a ground of appeal has been used to formulate an issue for determination, using it again to formulate another issue will corrupt that other issue for determination and render it incompetent.

– Mbaba JCA. Aduba v. Aduba (2018)

Was this dictum helpful?

ALLEGING MISDIRECTION OF LAW

It is trite law that where a party alleged misdirection of law, he must show particulars of the misdirection related to a specific finding or observation or reasoning in the judgment of the trial Court. The particulars of the alleged misdirection must necessarily be stated because not every misdirection will be fatal to the decision of the trial Court or lead to setting same aside on appeal. See M/V CAROLINE MAERSK and ORS. v. NOKOY INV. LTD (2002) LPELR- 3182 (SC) and OKOTIE-EBOH v. MANAGER and ORS. (2004) LPELR.

— B.B. Aliyu, JCA. Oboh v. Oboh (2021) – CA/B/372/12

Was this dictum helpful?

ESSENCE OF PARTICULARS OF GROUND OF APPEAL

The essence of particulars to a ground of appeal is to explain or substantiate on the ground or grounds. Where the particulars are incorporated and embedded in the ground of appeal, as in this case, it does not make ground 2 incompetent. This method I would term as a “short cut” in drafting and formulating grounds of appeal by the learned counsel to the Appellant.

– Uwa, JCA. GTB v. Innoson (2014) – CA/I/258/2011

Was this dictum helpful?

PURPOSE OF OMNIBUS GROUND OF APPEAL

An omnibus ground of appeal is therefore designed to allow a complaint on evaluation of evidence and it encompasses complaint of improper evaluation of evidence. It implies that the judgment of the trial court cannot be supported by the weight of the evidence adduced by the successful party which the trial judge either wrongly accepted or that the inference drawn or conclusion reached by the trial Judge based on the accepted evidence cannot be justified. An omnibus ground of appeal also implies that there is no evidence which if accepted would support the findings of the trial judge.

– Ogwuegbu JSC. Ajibona v. Kolawole (1996)

Was this dictum helpful?

No more related dictum to show.