CORAM

---

Tijjani Abubakar -Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria

Haruna Simon Tsammani -Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria

Stephen jonah Adah-Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria-habeeb adewale olumuyiwa abiru

Habeeb Adewale Olumuyiwa Abiru-Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria

Mohammed Baba Idris Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria

---

PARTIES

---

1. ALH. MOHAMMED DABO

2. UMARU MOHAMMED

APPELLANTS 

---

1. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE TARABA STATE

2. OKPARAKA GEORGE

(THE D.P.O. MARABA BAISSA DIVISION DONGA LGSA, TARABA STATE)

RESPONDENTS 

---

AREA(S) OF LAW

---

APPEAL, FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS, CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE, OMNIBUS GROUND OF APPEAL, DAMAGES, PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS, POLICE BRUTALITY, HUMAN RIGHTS

 

---

SUMMARY OF FACTS

On or about the 15th day of January, 2017, at Mararaba Baissa, Donga Local Government Area of Taraba State, it was alleged that the fundamental rights to personal liberty and dignity of human person of the 2nd appellant, a son of the 1st appellant, were infringed upon by officers and men of the Nigeria Police working under the 1st and 2nd respondents. It was further alleged that by the assault and murder of one Yusuf Mohammed who was the 1st appellant’s son, by the officers of the 1st respondent without any justification, the deceased’s right to life as enshrined under Section 33 of the Constitution was breached.

The appellants commenced an action at the trial court for enforcement of fundamental rights, seeking declarations of breach of constitutional rights, N100,000,000 as exemplary and aggravated damages, and an order for the release of the deceased’s corpse for burial. The trial court delivered judgment on 15th February 2017, awarding N5,000,000 in favour of the 1st appellant against the respondents for unlawfully killing his son and ordered the release of the body.

Dissatisfied with the judgment, the respondents appealed to the Court of Appeal using only an omnibus ground of appeal, challenging the award of N5,000,000. The appellants raised a preliminary objection arguing that an omnibus ground could not be used to challenge specific damages awarded. The Court of Appeal dismissed the preliminary objection and allowed the appeal, setting aside the award of N5,000,000. The appellants then appealed to the Supreme Court.

 

---

HELD

---

1.The appeal was allowed.

2.The Court held that an omnibus ground of appeal cannot be used to challenge specific issues such as the award of damages, which must be raised by substantive grounds of appeal with particulars.

3.The judgment of the Court of Appeal was set aside as being perverse for turning the law on its head by allowing an omnibus ground to challenge specific damages.

4.The preliminary objection should have been upheld and the appeal to the Court of Appeal should have been struck out in limine.

 

---

ISSUES

---

1.Were the learned Justices of the lower Court not wrong when they dismissed the appellants’ preliminary objection and proceeded to entertain the respondents’ appeal even though incompetent?

2.Were the learned Justices of the lower Court not wrong when the Court set aside the damages of N5,000,000.00 (Five Million Naira), when the underlying declaration of injury is unchallenged, valid, binding and subsisting?

 

---

RATIONES DECIDENDI

---

OMNIBUS GROUND OF APPEAL – SCOPE AND NATURE

---

“It is true that an omnibus ground of appeal implies that the judgment of 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 cannot be justified. It also implies that there is no evidence which if accepted would support the findings of the trial judge.” – Per UWAIS, JSC (as he then was)

 

---

OMNIBUS GROUND OF APPEAL – GENERAL NATURE AND BROAD CHALLENGE

---

“From this expression, an omnibus ground of appeal is a general ground which allows the appellate Court the opportunity to review the entire judgment of the trial Court and not limited to specific or factual issues which could be raised in other grounds of appeal. It gives room for a broad challenge to the trial Court’s decision on factual findings or overall fairness.” – Per STEPHEN JONAH ADAH, JSC

 

---

OMNIBUS GROUND OF APPEAL – CATCH-ALL GROUND FOR FACTUAL ISSUES

---

“It is a kind of catch-all ground which queries the whole decision of the Court on issues of fact and evaluation of facts before the trial Court. If it is deeply appreciated, the omnibus ground looks like a safety net to an appellant who wants to upturn the trial Court’s decision against him.” – Per STEPHEN JONAH ADAH, JSC

 

---

OMNIBUS GROUND OF APPEAL – LIMITATIONS ON USE

---

“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.” – Per STEPHEN JONAH ADAH, JSC

 

---

OMNIBUS GROUND OF APPEAL – COMPLETENESS AND PARTICULARS

---

“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.” – Per STEPHEN JONAH ADAH, JSC

 

---

OMNIBUS GROUND OF APPEAL – LIMITATION TO EVIDENCE APPRAISAL

---

“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 fact or issue. Specific issues can only be raised by a substantive ground of appeal.” – Per STEPHEN JONAH ADAH, JSC

 

---

OMNIBUS GROUND OF APPEAL – CANNOT ATTACK SPECIFIC FINDINGS

---

“It follows, therefore, that you cannot use omnibus ground to attack a specific finding in a case.” – Per STEPHEN JONAH ADAH, JSC

 

---

OMNIBUS GROUND OF APPEAL – SPECIFIC PROHIBITION ON DAMAGES

---

“The omnibus ground of appeal cannot be used to raise specific questions in an appeal. For example, it cannot be used to raise the issue of award of damages in an appeal. Such specific issue ought to be raised in the grounds of appeal.” – Per STEPHEN JONAH ADAH, JSC

 

---

COURT OF APPEAL DECISION – PERVERSITY IN LAW APPLICATION

---

“The lower Court in the face of this authority cited by it, turned the law on its head by taking a position that is antithetical to the well settled position of the law. The lower Court’s decision therefore, is perverse.” – Per STEPHEN JONAH ADAH, JSC

 

---

OMNIBUS GROUND OF APPEAL – DISTINCTION BETWEEN AWARD AND QUANTUM

---

“What I understand the Court below to be saying is that where a party appeals against award of damages, he is at liberty to do so by an omnibus ground of appeal. That, it is only when he seeks to appeal against the quantum of damages awarded that he is mandated to raise a specific ground of appeal.” – Per HARUNA SIMON TSAMMANI, JSC

 

---

OMNIBUS GROUND OF APPEAL – COMPLAINT AGAINST TOTALITY OF EVIDENCE

---

“It should be noted that an omnibus ground of appeal is a complaint against the totality of the evidence adduced at the trial. It cannot be used to complain against a finding of fact on a specific issue, which must be raised by a substantive ground of appeal.” – Per HARUNA SIMON TSAMMANI, JSC

 

---

OMNIBUS GROUND OF APPEAL – PROHIBITION ON LAW AND ERROR ISSUES

---

“An omnibus ground of appeal cannot also be used to raise any issue of law or error in law.” – Per HARUNA SIMON TSAMMANI, JSC

 

---

SPECIFIC GROUND REQUIREMENT – DAMAGES REQUIRING PARTICULARS

---

“Clearly, the ground of appeal raised before the trial Court is specific as to the quantum of damages awarded. In other words, it complains against the amount or sum of Five Million Naira (N5,000,000.00) awarded as damages. It is specific as to the award of damages made by the trial Court. In the circumstances, it required a specific ground of appeal with particulars to validly ventilate it.” – Per HARUNA SIMON TSAMMANI, JSC

 

---

CASES CITED

---

---

STATUTES REFERRED TO

---

Constitution of Nigeria 1999 (as amended)

Section 33 of the Constitution of Nigeria 1999 (as amended)

Order 2 Rule 3 of the Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules 2009

Order 7 Rule 2 of the Court of Appeal Rules 2021

Order 7 Rule 2(3) of the Court of Appeal Rules 2021

Order 7 Rule 3 of the Court of Appeal Rules 2016

Order 7 Rule 3 of the Court of Appeal Rules 2021

 

---

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT