CORAM

---

ALOYSIUS IYORGYER KATSINA-ALU CHIEF, JUSTICE, NIGERIA

---

PARTIES

---

1. CHIEF PETER AMADI NWANKWO2. MRS. PATRICIA OBIAGELI NWANKWO. APPELLANTS

---

RESPONDENTS

---

AREA(S) OF LAW

---

---

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The respondent who was the plaintiff in the High Court of Enugu State claims against the defendants jointly and severally for the sum of $500,000.00 (Five hundred Thousand US Dollars) being the principal sum of the loan due from the first and second/Defendants to the Plaintiff under a personal guarantee executed by the Defendants to secure a loan granted by the Plaintiff to Amike Ezzangbo Community farms limited under a loan granted by the plaintiff to Amike Ezzangbo Community Farms Limited under a loan Agreement dated 18th January, 1990 payment of which sum the First and Second Defendants have failed, refused and/or neglected to pay despite repeated demands. Interest thereafter at the rate of 6% (six percent) per annum from the date of judgment until the entire judgment sum is finally liquidated. Interest thereafter at the rate of 6% (six percent) per annum from the date of judgment until the entire judgment sum is finally liquidated.

---

HELD

---

1. Whether the Court of Appeal applied moral persuasion instead of legal rules in determining the appeal before it2. Whether the Appellants in this case in the High Court were denied fair hearing which resulted in perverse justice?

---

ISSUES

---

1. Whether the Court of Appeal applied moral persuasion instead of legal rules in determining the appeal before it2. Whether the Appellants in this case in the High Court were denied fair hearing which resulted in perverse justice?

---

RATIONES DECIDENDI

---

A SUPPORTING AFFIDAVIT TO NOTICE OF INTENTION TO DEFEND – WHAT SAME MUST SHOW TO ENABLE THE COURT TRANSFER THE MATTER TO A GENERAL CAUSE LIST.

---

“It is trite that unless a defendant in its supporting affidavit of intention to defend a suit on the undefended list states a good defence and the particulars of such defence are adequately set out, and they are such that if proved would constitute such a defence, the court will not transfer the suit to the general cause list, and allow the defendant to defend the suit” ” PER MUKHTAR, J.S.C

---

FAILURE TO LINK ISSUES IN AN APPEAL TO THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL WILL RENDER THE APPEAL INCOMPETENT

---

“The settled law is that an issue formulated for determination must be distilled from a ground of appeal, and where it has no ground of appeal to relate to, and then it has no part to play in the determination of the appeal, and so the appellate court has no option than to disregard the said issue” PER MUKHTAR, J.S.C

---

GROUNDS OF APPEAL AND ISSUES FORMULATED THEREFROM THAT ATTACK THE OBITER DICTA OF A DECISION ARE INCOMPETENT

---

“It is very clear that the complaint of the appellants in ground one of the grounds of appeal is not directed at the ratio in the decision of the Court of Appeal but at the obiter dictum and therefore very irrelevant and incompetent and liable to be struck out” PER MUKHTAR, J.S.C

---

MEANING OF GROUNDS OF APPEAL

---

“Grounds of appeal are meant to attack findings of a court that have bearing on the case put up by a litigant. In other words it should be related to a decision of the court and contain complaints an appellant rely on to succeed in setting aside a decision, the ratio decendi of a judgment, not just observations and passing remarks of a judge in the course of writing a judgment” PER MUKHTAR, J.S.C

---

CASES CITED

---

Jipreze v. OkonkwoNishizawa Ltd. v. JethwaniJohn Wallingford v. The Directors, & C. of the Mutual Society, and the Official liquidatorNfor v. Ashaka Cement Co. LtdAkpan v. StateAkibu v. OduntanIIoabachie v. IloabachieErivo v. Obi

---

STATUTES REFERRED TO

---

NONE

---

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT