SAHEED OLUWARANTI ARIORI V ASSET MANAGEMENT CORPORATION OF NIGERIA
April 8, 2026ZIDORA GROUP LIMITED & ANOR V OLANIPEKUN DARAMOLA & ORS
April 10, 2026ALHAJI ABDUL-RAUF TIJJANI & ORS V FIRST BANK OF NIGERIA PLC
Legalpedia Citation: (2026-01) Legalpedia 84681 (SC)
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria
Fri Jan 23, 2026
Suit Number: SC.6/2015
CORAM
Ibrahim mohammed musa saulawa – Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria
Emmanuel Akomaye Agim – Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria
Chidi Nwaoma Uwa – Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria
Moore Aseimo Abraham Adumein – Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria
Mohammed Baba Idris – Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria
PARTIES
1. ALHAJI ABDUL-RAUF TIJJANI
2. TUNDOKUN INVESTMENT COMPANY LIMITED
3. TUNDOKUN NIGERIA ENTERPRISES LIMITED
APPELLANTS
FIRST BANK OF NIGERIA PLC
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE, APPEALS, GROUNDS OF APPEAL, COMPETENCE OF APPEAL, BRIEF OF ARGUMENT, ISSUES FOR DETERMINATION, PRELIMINARY OBJECTION, REPLY BRIEF, ABUSE OF COURT PROCESS, COSTS, LEGAL REPRESENTATION, LITIGANTS IN PERSON, JUDICIAL BIAS, ADMINISTRATIVE DECISIONS, FAIR HEARING, FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS, VEXATIOUS LITIGATION
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The appellants were claimants in Suit No: ID/1606/2007 instituted in the High Court of Lagos State, Ikeja, against the respondent (First Bank of Nigeria PLC) as defendant. The appellants claimed N5,000,000,000 as damages for libel committed by the defendant for giving inaccurate and false reference about the appellants’ financial standing to Unity Bank PLC, an order of perpetual injunction restraining further publication of such false references, and N100,000,000 as damages for breach of contract for giving the reference without the appellants’ consent.
During the proceedings at the trial court before Hon. Justice Y. O. Idowu, the 1st appellant (Alhaji Abdul-Rauf Tijjani) wrote a letter dated October 19, 2011, to the Honourable Chief Judge of Lagos State stating that he “has lost confidence in his lordship based on the following obvious facts.” He requested that the case be transferred from that court to another court but not to F. O. Atilade J.’s Court.
After an administrative inquiry through Mrs. A. Ipaye-Nwachukwu (Deputy Chief Registrar (Legal) of the High Court of Lagos State), the Honourable Chief Judge, by a letter dated March 7, 2012, informed the 1st appellant that having read through the petition, the proceedings, and the reaction of counsel on the other side, it was found that the petition lacked merit and the request for transfer was accordingly refused.
Dissatisfied with this administrative decision of the Chief Judge, the appellants filed an appeal in the Court of Appeal, Lagos, on March 12, 2012, identified as Appeal No: CA/L/457/2012. That appeal was dismissed by the Court of Appeal on December 2, 2014.
The appellants then appealed to the Supreme Court against the Court of Appeal’s decision. The 1st appellant filed his brief of argument on January 30, 2015, formulating three issues for determination. On behalf of the 2nd and 3rd appellants, a separate brief was filed on November 13, 2024 by Abang Odok Ogar, Esq., formulating three different issues for determination. However, the 2nd and 3rd appellants did not file any separate notice of appeal from that signed and filed by the 1st appellant.
The respondent’s brief, settled by Ibrahim A. Buba, Esq., raised a preliminary objection urging the Court to dismiss the appeal for being incompetent on the following grounds: (1) the notice of appeal has no competent grounds; (2) the issues for determination are incompetent thereby making the entire brief incompetent; (3) the appellants did not comply with Order 8 Rules 2, 3, and 4 of the Supreme Court Rules when couching their notice and grounds of appeal; (4) the grounds of appeal are vague and contain legal arguments; and (5) the appellants proliferated issues for determination.
The appellants did not file any reply brief in response to the respondent’s preliminary objection.
The appellants’ notice of appeal, filed on December 12, 2014, contained two grounds which were rambling, verbose, argumentative, and contained wordy narratives. The grounds made allegations of bias against various judges and the Chief Judge, referenced multiple other appeals and proceedings, and included extensive quotations from case law and constitutional provisions.
The 1st appellant is not a legal practitioner but has been filing and prosecuting numerous cases, matters, motions, and appeals in various Nigerian courts. The learned counsel for the 2nd and 3rd appellants filed a brief formulating three issues for determination without linking any of them to the grounds of appeal filed by the 1st appellant.
HELD
1. The respondent’s preliminary objection was upheld and the appeal was dismissed.
2. The Court held that the appellants’ failure to file a reply brief in response to the respondent’s preliminary objection implied that they conceded the arguments raised in the objection.
3. The Court held that the two grounds of appeal in the appellants’ notice of appeal, though numbered, were rambling, verbose, argumentative, and contained wordy narratives.
4. The Court held that grounds of appeal must not be verbose, argumentative, or vague, and must be concise and straight to the point, conveying a clear message.
5. The Court held that an appellate court lacks jurisdiction to entertain an appeal which is not fought on valid grounds of appeal.
6. The Court held that the grounds of appeal in the appellants’ notice of appeal were grossly incompetent and constituted a clear mockery of the process of the Supreme Court.
7. The Court held that issues formulated from incompetent grounds of appeal must be struck out.
8. The Court held that two issues cannot be raised from one ground of appeal, as a ground of appeal is supposed to encompass a single complaint.
9. The Court held that an issue not covered by a ground of appeal is incompetent.
10. The Court held that an issue for determination must arise from and relate to a ground or grounds of appeal.
11. The Court held that the 2nd and 3rd appellants’ learned counsel filed a brief on their behalf without those appellants filing any separate notice of appeal from that signed by the 1st appellant.
12. The Court held that the learned counsel for the 2nd and 3rd appellants distilled three issues for determination without linking any of them to a ground of appeal.
13. The Court held that the appeal was not only incompetent but also an abuse of the process of the Court.
14. The Court ordered that no further appeal or process prepared and signed by the 1st appellant shall be accepted and filed in the Registry of the Supreme Court for hearing.
15. The Court awarded costs of N2,000,000 (Two Million Naira) against the 1st appellant in favour of the respondent.
16. The Court awarded separate costs of N2,000,000 (Two Million Naira) against the 2nd and 3rd appellants in favour of the respondent, to be paid personally by their learned counsel, Abang Odok Ogar, Esq.
ISSUES
1st Appellant’s Issues:
1. Whether the Rules of Court allow the Court below to resolve the conflict between Fundamental Rights, Fundamental Objective and Directive Principle of State Policy in favour of the latter?
2. Whether it is proper for the Court of Appeal to speculate on an issue which was not part of the grounds of appeal and was also not an issue for determination before the Court?
3. Whether the Supreme Court can depart from the Rules of Order 11 procedure precedent in the circumstance of this appeal and deem the appellants’ appeal as been properly argued on the appellants’ brief of argument alone and give final judgment on the merit of their case?
2nd and 3rd Appellants’ Issues (formulated by learned counsel):
1. Whether an admission made on a pleading requires further proof or if the party making the admission is estopped from denying the facts?
2. Whether the Courts have the competence to allow the Respondent to re-litigate issues already resolved in the trial Court, specifically those that were dismissed through a motion in limine?
3. Whether the Supreme Court is competent to resolve the damages claim for libel against the Respondent based solely on the briefs and records of appeal?
Respondent’s Preliminary Objection:
1. Whether the appeal is competent given that: (1) the notice of appeal has no competent grounds; (2) the issues for determination are incompetent; (3) non-compliance with Order 8 Rules 2, 3, and 4 of the Supreme Court Rules; (4) grounds of appeal are vague and contain legal arguments; and (5) proliferation of issues for determination.?
RATIONES DECIDENDI
REPLY BRIEF – FUNCTION AND EFFECT OF FAILURE TO FILE
“The law is settled that ‘the function of a reply brief is to refute … new arguments in the respondent’s brief, that is, a reply brief is, usually, filed in response to new issues raised in the respondent’s brief.'” – Per Nweze, JSC in Onuwa Kalu v. State (quoted with approval by ADUMEIN, J.S.C.)
FAILURE TO FILE REPLY BRIEF – CONCESSION OF POINTS RAISED
“It is instructive to note that learned counsel for the 7th appellant refused and/or neglected to file a reply brief to the brief of the 1st and 2nd respondents which would have made it possible for him to confront the issues/points canvassed in the preliminary objection, neither did he make any oral presentation on the matter at the hearing of the appeal. I hold the considered view that the failure or neglect of the 7th appellant to file a reply brief or make oral presentation in response to the points/canvassed in the Objection means that the 7th appellant concedes the points so canvassed because he has no answer to them.” – Per Onnoghen, JSC in Prince Kilani Adekeye & 2 Ors. v. Prince Summonu Adesina & Ors. (quoted with approval by ADUMEIN, J.S.C.)
REPLY BRIEF – SCOPE AND CIRCUMSTANCES FOR FILING
“Suffice it to say however, that it is the general practice since the introduction of brief writing that there may be need for an appellant to file a reply brief when an issue of law or argument is raised in the respondent’s brief not necessarily being a mere repetition of what the appellant’s brief contained. In other words, where a respondent’s brief raises issues on points of law not covered in the appellant’s brief, an appellant should file a reply to deal with such new points/matters…Filing of a reply brief even by the appellant, where desirable, should not be used to either extend the scope of the arguments in the appellant’s brief or to raise issues that did not arise as new issues or matters in the respondent’s brief. It is to be noted generally, that although filing of a reply brief is not mandatory…appellant’s failure to reply to an issue or point of law raised in the respondent’s brief and where he merely relies on or adopts his brief at the hearing of the appeal without an oral reply that may amount to a concession of the issue or point of law raised.” – Per Ibrahim Tanko Muhammad, JSC (later CJN) in The Shell Petroleum Development Company of Nigeria Limited & 2 Ors. v. Chief Isaac Osaro Agbara & 9 Ors (quoted with approval by ADUMEIN, J.S.C.)
REQUIREMENTS FOR GROUNDS OF APPEAL – NUMBERED, CONCISE, WITHOUT ARGUMENTS
“By the above rules of this Court, the grounds of appeal must be numbered, concise and without arguments or narratives. The grounds of appeal must also not be vague or general in terms, except the omnibus ground which alleges or claims that ‘the judgment is against the weight of evidence.'” – Per ADUMEIN, J.S.C.
FEATURES OF COMPETENT GROUND OF APPEAL
“It is to be noted that grounds of appeal as a strict rule must not be verbose, argumentative and vague, as these features rob it of its substance. To achieve its object, it must be concise, straight to the point. It must convey a message. Where this is not the case, it is tantamount to a pipe without a sound, a distinct sound the error contained in the said judgment prolix, argumentative and vague. Such grounds are not permitted under the rules of this Court. That is why this Court won’t say that drafting of grounds of appeal require special expertise because the consequence of non-compliance is that the grounds of appeal may be struck out thereby making the issues formulated thereon incompetent.” – Per Mary Ukaego Peter-Odili, JSC in Set Success Enterprises and Company Limited v. Ibeju-Lekki Local Government Council & Anor (quoted with approval by ADUMEIN, J.S.C.)
PURPOSE OF GROUND OF APPEAL – NOTICE TO OTHER SIDE
“The whole purpose of a ground of appeal is to appraise or put the other side on notice of the nature of complaint being raised therein, and the overriding consideration is whether the ground, is clearly stated vague.” – Per Mohammed, JSC in Aigbobahi v. Aifuwa (quoted with approval by ADUMEIN, J.S.C.)
GROUND OF APPEAL – CLARITY AND SPECIFICITY REQUIRED
“A ground of appeal must be so succinctly couched and specifically described that the other side will know the exact complaint against the judgment. It should also avoid repetition, narration or arguments. The whole purpose of grounds of appeal is to give notice to the side as to what case he is going to meet on appeal. There should be no ambiguities or roundabout arguments in a ground of appeal.” – Per Anie v. Ugagbe (quoted with approval by ADUMEIN, J.S.C.)
APPELLATE COURT JURISDICTION – DEPENDENCE ON VALID GROUNDS
“The law is settled that ‘an appellate Court lacks jurisdiction, in the sense of competence, to entertain an appeal which is not fought on valid grounds of appeal.'” – Per Okay Achike, JSC in Calabar East Co-operative v. Etim Emmanuel Ikot (quoted with approval by ADUMEIN, J.S.C.)
INCOMPETENT GROUNDS OF APPEAL – COURT’S FINDING
“The grounds of appeal, in the appellants’ notice of appeal, are grossly incompetent and constitute a clear mockery of the process of the Supreme Court of Nigeria. This Court is not meant for filing gravely incompetent processes, such as the appellants’ purported notice of appeal, which contains no comprehensible or understandable ground of appeal. I do not think that even a reasonable village customary Court would sit to entertain gibberish, illogical, nonsensical or unintelligible complaints or grievances as those contained in the appellants’ notice of appeal.” – Per ADUMEIN, J.S.C.
ISSUES MUST ARISE FROM GROUNDS OF APPEAL
“In our jurisprudence, any issue formulated from an incompetent ground or grounds of appeal will be struck out.” – Per ADUMEIN, J.S.C.
ONE ISSUE PER GROUND OF APPEAL
“It is also settled that ‘Two issues cannot be raised from one (a) ground of appeal, as a ground of appeal is supposed to encompass a single complaint.'” – Per Christopher Chukwuma-Eneh, JSC in Lasisi Ogbe v. Sule Asade (quoted with approval by ADUMEIN, J.S.C.)
ISSUE NOT COVERED BY GROUND OF APPEAL IS INCOMPETENT
“The law is clear that an issue not covered by a ground of appeal is incompetent.” – Per ADUMEIN, J.S.C.
ABUSE OF PROCESS – PROHIBITION OF FURTHER FILINGS AND PERSONAL COSTS
“Just as in the case of Chief Ambrose Owuru & Anor. v. President Mohammadu Buhari & 3 Ors. (supra), it is hereby ordered that no further appeal or process prepared and signed by the 1st appellant shall be accepted and filed in the Registry of this Court for hearing…To say the least, this appeal is not only incompetent, it is also an abuse of the process of this Court. Consequently, this appeal is hereby dismissed. The sum of N2,000,000.00 (Two Million Naira only) is hereby awarded as costs against the 1st appellant and in favour of the respondent. The same sum of N2,000,000.00 (Two Million Naira only) is, separately, awarded as costs in favour of the respondent and against the 2nd and 3rd appellants and which costs shall be paid personally by the learned counsel – Abang Odok Ogar, Esq.” – Per ADUMEIN, J.S.C.
CASES CITED
STATUTES REFERRED TO
• Supreme Court Rules, 1985 (as amended)
o Order 8 Rule 2(1) to 2(4) (Requirements for notice of appeal, grounds of appeal, and competence)
• Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended)
o Section 34 (Right to dignity of human person – referenced in grounds of appeal)
o Section 35 (Right to personal liberty – referenced in grounds of appeal)
o Section 36(1) (Right to fair hearing – referenced in grounds of appeal)
o Section 46(1) (Enforcement of fundamental rights – referenced in grounds of appeal)
o Section 287 (Decisions of Court of Appeal binding – referenced in grounds of appeal)
OTHER CITATIONS
CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT
COUNSEL
1. A.K. Tijjani (the 1st Appellant) appears in person – for 1st Appellant
2. Anthony Ndanusa, Esq., with him, Sarah Brendan Omini, Esq., and Tomiwa Ola Ogundele, Esq. – for 2nd and 3rd AppellantsFor Appellant(s)
3. Ibrahim A. Baba, Esq., with him, Bala Nomau, Esq.For Respondent(s)
