Procedure for challenging an incompetent ground of appeal
OISAMOJE v. STATE (2026) LPELR-83500(SC) (Pp. 10-12 paras. F)
The law and practice governing appellate procedure in this regard are firmly settled and admit of no ambiguity. Where a Respondent seeks to contest the competence of a particular ground of appeal, as opposed to the competence of the appeal as a whole, such an objection must be raised timeously and in the proper manner, that is, by way of a Motion on Notice.
It is not open to a Respondent to mount such a challenge surreptitiously or indirectly by merely couching an issue in the brief of argument which, in substance, attacks the validity of the ground of appeal itself. Put differently, a ground of appeal cannot be impeached through the back door by the formulation of an issue against it. Any attempt to do so is procedurally incompetent and liable to be discountenanced.
The Respondent's approach in the instant appeal, wherein the competence of Ground 3 is questioned solely through an issue raised in the brief of argument, runs foul of settled appellate practice and cannot be sustained.
This Court emphatically restated the position of the law in STANBIC IBTC BANK PLC VS. LONGTERM GLOBAL CAPITAL LTD & ORS (2025) LPELR - 81128 (SC), when it held that:
"it has been the established rule of practice in our appellate jurisprudence that when a party is querying the competence of grounds of appeal, he can only do that through a Motion on Notice. It is never done by way of a preliminary objection or an argument originated in a brief of argument as was done by the counsel for the 1st to 4th Respondents in this case. The application in that wise is not properly before the Court, so the jurisdiction of the Court has not properly been activated to entertain the objection."
imagine he goes lowkey… no interviews, no noise, no begging for sympathy. just years of silence. rebuilding. reading. sharpening. understanding how power really moves.
then one day he returns, not as a victim, but as pressure. as policy. as a force nobody can ignore. not vibes, not talk… earned authority.
and the same system that failed him now answers to him. the same terror that once broke him now gets broken, piece by piece.
maybe stories like his are not just survival stories… maybe they’re blueprints for changing this country.
sorry i’m drinking again 🙂↕️ 🍻
Na like this people dey jump enter business based on exaggerated projections like this.
By the time you buy this and it stays idle for months, you go use am turn Amala.
Supreme Court has finally laid to rest the issue of consent requirements in garnishee proceedings.
The court has held that the Central Bank is not a public officer as envisaged under section 84 of the SCPA.
Also, consent of the AGF is no longer mandatory to garnishee the funds of MDAs in custody of the Central Bank.
CBN V LIDAN ENGINEERING LTD & Ors (2026) NLC- 822021 (SC) at P.16; Paras H-C.
@jurist_oriko and @TheIdLawrence have you guys seen this judgment ?