site logo
Skip to case content
Case Digest

ENAYE SISAMI RICHARD ABAH V. ERIBO MONDAY & ORS. (2015)

Supreme Court of Nigeria

Coram
  • John Afolabi Fabiyi JSC
  • Clara Bata Ogunbiyi JSC
  • Kudirat M. O. Kekere-Ekun JSC
  • John Inyang Okoro JSC
  • Chima Centus Nweze JSC
Parties

Appellant:

  • Enaye Sisami Richard Abah

Respondents:

  • Eribo Monday
  • National Youth Service Corps
  • Peoples’ Democratic Party
  • Bayelsa State Independent Electoral Commission
Suit number
SC. 3/2014
Delivered on

Background

This case arises from an appeal lodged by Enaye Sisami Richard Abah against a ruling by the Court of Appeal, which dismissed his appeal due to alleged procedural lapses. After the Federal High Court's decision, Abah sought a review and filed applications for a stay of proceedings while his appeal was being processed. However, his counsel's inadvertent failure to comply with the new Court of Appeal Practice Direction 2013 led to significant complications in the case.

Issues

Two primary issues surfaced in this appeal:

  1. Did the lower court violate the appellant's fundamental right to fair hearing?
  2. Did the lower court possess the jurisdiction to dismiss the appellant's appeal under the circumstances presented?

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court identified that a court's duty to determine applications for adjournment is crucial to fair hearing rights. The court determined that all procedures and applications pending before the court must be addressed, and failure to do so results in a miscarriage of justice.

Court Findings

The Supreme Court found that:

  1. The lower court erred in dismissing the appellant's claim without ruling on the application for adjournment, thereby violating his right to a fair hearing.
  2. The inherent jurisdiction of the lower court to strike out appeals is permissible but must be exercised judiciously.
  3. When counsel fails due to inadvertence, the litigant should not be penalized.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, acknowledging that the dismissal of the appellant's case was premature and unjust. Instead of a dismissal, it struck out the appeal for lack of proper procedure and remitted the case for further consideration.

Significance

This ruling highlights the essential nature of fair hearing in judicial processes, underscoring the requirement that courts must govern their discretion judiciously. It emphasizes that parties should be afforded the opportunity to be heard, reinforcing the imperative for courts to ensure that all applications before them are ruled upon rather than dismissed outright.

Counsel:

  • Samuel Brisibe Esq.
  • O. P. Odia Esq.
  • Somina Johnbull Esq.