FASESIN OLUFEMI VS OYERINDE
July 11, 2025JOHN IMO VS THE STATE
July 11, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (1991-11) Legalpedia 87455 (SC)
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria
Holden at Lagos
Wed Dec 11, 1991
Suit Number: SC 314/1989
CORAM
M.L. UWAIS, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
S.M.A BELGORE, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
PHILIP NNAEMEKA-AGU, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
E.O.I AKPATA, JUSICE SUPREME COURT
P.N. NWOKEDI, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
JOHN C. OKAFOR
APPELLANTS
BENDEL NEWSPAPERS CORPORATION AND ORS
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
APPEAL- ENLARGEMENT OF TIME-EXERCISE OF DISCRETION- COURT OF APPEAL RULES.
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The appellant appealed to the Supreme Court against the ruling of the Court of Appeal refusing his application for an order for enlargement of the time to file Respondent’s Notice.
HELD
The Court of Appeal was in error when it failed to consider appellant’s application for enlargement of time to file respondent notice and delved into the merits of the proposed respondent’s notice at that stage.
ISSUES
Did the learned Justices of the Court of Appeal properly consider the application, by the appellant, for enlargement of time to file respondent’s notice?
RATIONES DECIDENDI
FACTORS TO BE CONSIDERED BY THE COURT IN GRANTING EXTENSION OF TIME
‘For in the exercise of discretion by court to grant application for extension of time, the length of the delay as well as the sufficiency of the explanation proferred for the delay must be taken into consideration by the court, before the discretion could be regarded as having been judicially exercised.’ Per M.L. Uwais Ag. CJN
CASES CITED
Agbeyegbe v. Ikomi (1949) 12 WACA 383 at pages 385-386.
STATUTES REFERRED TO
Court of Appeal Rules, Cap. 62 of the Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 1990
