Appellant's right to prosecute appeal

• Pages: 201-203

201

that he ever returned the 2nd respondent (Gozie Agbakoba) but pages 18,732 to 739

and 840 of the record show the documentary evidence that reveals the contrary.

Appellants have glaringly shown from the grounds of appeal their meddlesomeness.

They have no interest of their own to serve in the appeal.” Per Galadima, J.C.A., in

Balonwa v. Ikpeazu (2005) 13 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 941) 479 at 513 - 514.

(20) APPELLANT SEEKING TO SET ASIDE VERDICT OF LOWER

COURT

422. What an appellant must show to succeed on appeal.

“I need observe here that in order to get a reversal of the judgment appealed against,

an appellant complaining of an error by the lower Court or Tribunal which had

adjudicated must also show that error had led to a miscarriage of justice or that had

not the error been made the judgment appealed against would have been different

from what it was.” - Per Oguntade, J.C.A in Madagali L.G. v. N.P.C. Suit No. CA/

J/4/95; (1998) 11 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 572) 66 at 73.

423. Where an appellate Court finds that not all parties were before the

Court.

“The point I am making here is that even where this Court or any appellate Court

finds that not all parties were before the Court so many orders - namely striking out,

dismissal, non-suit, retrial - are available to that appellate Court. It is only the

surrounding circumstances of each individual case - including the way the claims

were formulated; whether those persons not joined were merely “proper parties” or

“desirable parties” or “necessary parties”, the effect of the proposed order on the

overall justice of the case etc. that will dictate the appropriate order to be made.”

Per Oputa, J.S.C., in Green v. Green (1987) 2 N.S.C.C. Pg. 1115 at 1121.

(21) APPELLANT’S RIGHT TO PROSECUTE APPEAL

424. An applicant for leave to appeal is an appellant.

“The Ipssimi verbis of section 222(a) of the Constitution say that what such a

person is seeking is leave to appeal. I do not see how or from where one can read

into sub-section (a) any intention that what such a person is taking is a preliminary

step to seeking leave. I find it extremely difficult to agree with learned counsel for

the appellant that Order 3 rule 3(4) was not made to be applicable to a person who

is seeking leave to appeal as a person interested. The wise men who made the

Constitution expressly stated in sub section (b) of section 222 that any right of appeal

under the section, which by definition under, section 31 of the Court of Appeal Act,

to be dealt with below; includes a person who applies for leave to appeal, shall be

exercised “In accordance with any Act of the National Assembly and rules of Court

for the time being in force regulating the powers, practice and procedure of the

Court of Appeal.” Order 3 rule 3(4) is one of such rules. It applies and regulates the

Appellant’s right to prosecute appeal Paras. 421-424