The meticulous drafting of grounds of appeal and their particulars stands as a vital linchpin in ensuring the effectiveness of legal arguments presented before the court. However, it is not uncommon for respondents to express dissatisfaction with the verbosity, argumentativeness, and narrative nature often found in appellant’s grounds and particulars, as evidenced in the case of Waziri & Anor v Geidam & Ors (2016) LPELR-40660(SC). Despite these recognised shortcomings, it is imperative to assess whether such deficiencies inherently render the grounds incompetent.

Practical Guide:

In accordance with the pronouncement of Peter-Odili, JSC, in Dakolo v Dakolo (2011) 16 NWLR (Pt. 1272) 22 at 53, mere verbosity, inelegance, or a narrative style should not serve as grounds for the striking out of appeals. Courts are duty-bound to uphold the principles of fairness and justice, even when faced with imperfectly crafted submissions as the court’s primary obligation is to administer justice. Therefore, while grounds of appeal may exhibit argumentativeness or repetitiveness, their substantive merit should never be disregarded.

Despite any perceived deficiencies in drafting style, the substance of the appellant’s grievances must remain the focal point of judicial scrutiny. As reiterated in Omisore v Aregbesola (2015) 15 NWLR (PT.1482) 205 at 257, courts prioritise substance over technicalities, ensuring that justice prevails.

Similarly, in APC v Jega & Ors (2023-LCER-48014-SC), Uwani Musa Abba Aji, JSC, emphasised the court’s obligation to adjudicate judiciously, even when confronted with imperfectly presented grounds of appeal. As long as the pertinent issues are discernible, courts should exercise discretion in assessing the merits of each case.

In conclusion, it is important for the judiciary to maintain a balance between the need for articulate presentation and the overarching mandate to deliver substantive justice. Legal practitioners should strive to construct grounds of appeal that are devoid of verbosity and inelegance, yet they must also remember that the core of their appeal lies in the significance of the issues raised. The judicature, in its wisdom, is inclined to look beyond the form and delve into the substance of the appeal, as justice should not be sacrificed on the altar of technicalities.

Levi I. Shaapera, Esq., is a legal research enthusiast with a passion for exploring the intricacies of the law. As the Founder and Editor-in-Chief of LawCompass Electronic Reports (LCER), he is dedicated to providing comprehensive legal analyses and insights. In addition to his role at LCER, Levi serves as the Managing Partner at Leis Law Clinic, where he applies his expertise to offer comprehensive legal services. With a commitment to excellence and a deep passion for the law, Levi plays a pivotal role in advancing legal scholarship and practice.

Email: [email protected] Phone: 09023499999 Website: www.leislawlp.pro

© LEIS LAW CLINIC