HASSAN vs. LIMAN(2022)LCN
/16792(CA)
PRINCIPLE:
“My Lords, on the Respondent’s Notice, I have taken time to consider the processes filed by the parties as in the Record of Appeal. I have also considered the issues canvassed by the parties before the lower Court as well as the findings in the judgment appealed against. In the Respondent’s Notice, the purpose as can be clearly discerned therefrom is to raise issue completely strange to the issues joined by the parties and on which the lower Court delivered its judgment. In law, a Respondent’s Notice cannot be relied upon outside the facts and issues canvassed in the Record of Appeal. It is therefore, not an avenue for a Respondent to raise and canvass any and every issues not supported by the Record of Appeal. Thus, the facts sought to be relied upon in a Respondent’s Notice must be apparent from the face of the Record of Appeal. See Inspector General of Police & Ors. V. Peter O. Ikpila & Anor. (2015) LPELR-40630 (CA), per Sir Biobele Abraham Georgewill, JCA.
In the circumstances therefore, I cannot but agree with the apt submissions of the learned senior counsel for the Appellant, and I do so hold, that there is nothing in the Respondent’s Notice that shows any intention in compliance with the correct purposes for the use of a Respondent’s Notice as provided by the Order 9 of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2021 and pronounced in countless numbers of decided cases. The Respondent does not by her Respondent’s Notice seek to contend that the decision of the lower Court was correct but its conclusion had adversely affected her and should be affirmed on other grounds as is required in law of a Respondent relying on a Respondent’s Notice. I hold therefore, that the Respondent’s Notice in the instant appeal is neither proper nor appropriate, as aptly and unassailably contended by the learned senior counsel for the Appellant, and which contention is hereby upheld and consequently, the Respondent’s Notice is hereby struck out. See Inspector General of Police & Ors. V. Peter O. Ikpila & Anor. (2015) LPELR-40630 (CA), per Sir Biobele Abraham Georgewill, JCA. See also Williams V. Daily Times (1990) 1 NWLR (Pt. 124) 1 AT p. 20; AG. Imo State V. Imo Rubber Estates Ltd. (2020) 13 NWLR (Pt. 1741) 209 AT p. 241; Gwede V. INEC (2014) 18 N WLR (Pt. 1438) 56; County V. City Bricks Development Company Ltd. & Anor. (2019) LPELR-46889 (CA).” Per GEORGEWILL, JCA.
