May 19, 2025
Legalpedia Citation: (2012) Legalpedia (SC) 19671 In the Supreme Court of Nigeria Mon Mar 5, 2012 Suit Number: SC. 13/2012 CORAM PARTIES SENATOR JOEL DANLAMI IKENYAHON. ISA […]
CORAM
PARTIES
SENATOR JOEL DANLAMI IKENYAHON. ISA ABU AJIYAACTION CONGRESS OF NIGERIA (ACN) APPELLANTS
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
This is an interlocutory appeal against the ruling of the court of appeal dismissing the Appellant/Applicant’s application for extension of time to perfect the conditions of appeal imposed by the trial High Court on the Appellant in the Court of Appeal.
HELD
The court found merit in the appeal, and allowed it
ISSUES
1. Whether the Appellant who is seeking extension of time to perfect the conditions of appeal imposed by the High Court Rules to exhibit e Notice of Appeal to his application OR Whether the failure of the Appellant to exhibit his Notice of Appeal to his application for extension to perfect the conditions of appeal imposed by the High Court is fatal to his application.
2. Whether from the affidavit evidence placed before the Court, the Court below was right in refusing the Appellant’s application for extension of time to perfect the conditions of appeal by the High Court.
RATIONES DECIDENDI
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE PROVISION OF ORDER 3 RULE 4(1) AND 4(2) OF THE COURT OF APPEAL RULES 2002
“It is quite clear that while the provisions of Rule 4(1) of Order 3 of the Rules are for any application for the doing of anything to which the Rules of the Court apply, such as filing of any processes like briefs of argument or the taking of any step in the proceeding of court like compliance with conditions of appeal, the provision of Rule 4(2) are specifically for enlargement of time within which to appeal and the conditions required under the rule of making the application.” MAHMUD MOHAMMED JSC
EXERCISE OF DISCRETION OF COURT IN RESPECT OF ENLARGEMENT OF TIME
“When there is an application for enlargement of time within which to do certain things or take certain procedural steps prescribed by the rule of Court, the Court should always bear in mind that the rules of Court must prima facie be obeyed and that to justify the exercise of its discretion, there must be some concrete materials upon which to base such exercise of discretion as was explained by this Court” MAHMUD MOHAMMED JSC
ESSENTIALS FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME WITHIN WHICH APPELLANT MAY TAKE CERTAIN PROCEDURAL STEPS
” There is no doubt that for an application for an enlargement of time within which an Appellant may take certain procedural steps to succeed, all the Applicant is required to do is to establish good substantial or exceptional reasons or circumstances to explain satisfactorily the delay in taking the steps in the issue required to justify the grant of the enlargement of time applied for” MAHMUD MOHAMMED JSC
EXERCISE OF JUDICIAL DISCRETION
” It is well settled that all judicial discretions must be exercised according to the common sense and justice in the matter. Where there is any miscarriage of justice in the exercise of such discretion, it is within the powers and competence of an appellate Court to interfere and have that exercise of discretion reviewed” MAHMUD MOHAMMED JSC
CASES CITED
Nalsa and Team associates v. N.N.P.C.(1991) 8 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 212) 652
Kwaham v. Elias (1960) S.C. N.L.R. 516
N.A. Williams & Ors. V. Hope Rising Voluntary Fund Society (1982) 1- 2 S.C. 145 at 152
Abiodun Odusote v. Olaitan Odusote (1971) 1 ALL N.L.R 219 at 222
Chief T.O.S. Benson v. Nigeria Agip Oil Co. (1982) 5 S.C.1
Otem Odey v. Ovat Edim of Akam (1990) 6 W.A.C.A 63 at 64
STATUTES REFERRED TO
Nalsa and Team associates v. N.N.P.C.(1991) 8 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 212) 652
Kwaham v. Elias (1960) S.C. N.L.R. 516
N.A. Williams & Ors. V. Hope Rising Voluntary Fund Society (1982) 1- 2 S.C. 145 at 152
Abiodun Odusote v. Olaitan Odusote (1971) 1 ALL N.L.R 219 at 222
Chief T.O.S. Benson v. Nigeria Agip Oil Co. (1982) 5 S.C.1
Otem Odey v. Ovat Edim of Akam (1990) 6 W.A.C.A 63 at 64