By
Chijioke M. Agbo
![](https://thenigerialawyer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/TheNigerialawyer-WhatsApp-Channel1.jpg")
1. Introduction
It is an age long and time honoured established principle of law which the apex Court has been consistent in its line of decisions that the concept of arrest of court Judgment is unknown to our jurisprudence and that an application of such nature is basically meant to frustrate the judicial process and a gimmick designed to forestall the delivery of Judgment for as long as the applicant wishes.
However, it is now a truism that the Law is well rooted that in every general rule, there are exception(s). Hon. Justice Peter O. Affen of the FCT High Court reminds us in the case of CHIGBO UZOR v.DIRECTOR GENERAL,STATE SECURITY SERVICES SUITNO: FCT/HC/M/3763/2011, where His Lordship remarked:
“But to every general rule, there are exceptions. That is why it is often said that’ the lay man knows the law but the lawyer knows the exception’; and the reality is that live cases are more about exceptions than general rules.”
In the light of the above, can it be said that the well rooted concept of arrest of Judgement does not admit any exception ?
2. What is Arrest of Judgement or when can an application be said to arrest a Judgement ?
The Black’s law Dictionary, 9th Edition defined Arrest of Judgment at page 125 as:
“The staying of a Judgment after its entry; esp., a court’s refusal to render or enforce a Judgment because of a defect apparent from the record”.
Furthermore, it states:We’re down on
“At common law, courts have the power to arrest Judgment for intrinsic causes appearing on the record, as when the verdict differs materially from the pleadings or when the case alleged in the pleadings is legally insufficient. Today, this type of defect must typically be objected to before trial or before judgment is entered, so that the motion in arrest of judgment has been largely superseded”.
3. Restating the General Rule on Arrest of Judgement
It should be noted that our Courts have held that the rules of Courts do not make provisions for an application to arrest a Judgment which is about to be delivered by a Court and that an application not recognized by the rules of Court cannot be described as a proper application. See also Alhaji M. Shetima & ors Vs Alhaji M. Gani & Ors (2011) NWLR (pt 1279) 413 p. 425.
In the case of Newswatch Communication Ltd Vs Atta (2006) LPELR-1986 (SC), the Court held that:
“An application for arrest of Judgment is an improper application and is unknown to our adjectival law and indeed our jurisprudence”.
See also Ukachukwu Vs PDP (2013) LPELR-21894 (SC); Ochor C. Ochor Vs Alphonsus Ojo & Ors (2008) 13 NWLR (Pt 1105) 524 p. 527; Kasiobi Nwankudu Vs Enouk Ifezuo Ibeto (2011) 2 NWLR ( pt. 1231) 209 p. 215; and Bob-Manuel Vs Briggs (1995) 7 NWLR (pt 409) 539.
Flowing from the cases above cited and other numerous cases dealing on arrest of Judgment, many have argued vigorously and consistently too, that the effect of the aforementioned cases is that no matter how an application is couched, once it is filed when a matter has been heard and adjourned for Judgment, then, the application will be regarded as one intending or seeking to arrest the Judgment of the Court.
4. Advancing the Exceptions
It is humbly submitted by this writer wishes with greatest respect, that this general notion that every application filed once a matter has been heard and adjourned for Judgment should be regarded as one seeking to arrest the Judgment of the Court is glazed and blended with exception (s).
The notion is elastic and not static, therefore, the exceptions are considered below:
a. Fair Hearing
Fair hearing constitutes an important pillar in our jurisprudence. The writer humbly takes the liberty to adopt the words of the Supreme Court in the famous case of ADIGUN vs. A-G, OYO STATE (1987) 1 NWLR (pt.53) 678 through Per Kayode Eso, JSC (of blessed memory) @ 721-722H-B; where it was held :
“Even if God gave Adam an oral hearing despite the evidence supplied by his act of covering his nakedness before the case against him (he) continued staying (in) the Garden of Eden was determined against him… Once an Appellant shows that there is an infringement of the principle of natural justice against him, it is my view that he needs show nothing more. The finding that there is an infringement of the principle is sufficient to grant him a remedy.”
More interestingly, Per Saulawa JCA added another version to that of Justice Kayode Eso’s postulation in UNIVERSITY OF CALABAR TEACHING HOSPITAL v. LIZIKON (NIG) LTD & ANOR (2017) LPELR-42339 (CA)thus:
“With utmost deference to the foremost erudite jurist, the genesis of the well-cherished doctrine could be further traced to the time that God in His infinite wisdom created our progenitor Adam, and commanded the Angels nay Satan to bow to Adam. It is trite, that all the Angels obeyed God’s command and duly prostrated to Adam, except Satan. God then queried…Thus, even Satan was accorded an oral hearing before the Almighty God cursed him to eternity.”
On the strength of the above importance of the fair hearing principle, we submit that arrest of judgement can also give way to the fair hearing of a party to warrant such an application to arrest a Court Judgement.
In the case of Ajagungbade Vs Governor of Oyo State & Ors (2018) LPELR-45968 (CA), the Court of Appeal per Ojo J.C.A @ ratio 4, held thus (in extenso):
“This appeal was argued and reserved for Judgment by this Court on the 26th of April, 2018. However, before Judgment could be delivered, the counsel to the 3rd Respondent filed two motions both dated 27th April, 2018. In the first motion, he sought to re-open the appeal and to extend time within which to file the 3rd Respondent’s Brief of Argument. The Appellant opposed the application on the ground that it is a ploy by the 3rd Respondent to arrest the Judgment of this Court. It is trite that any application to arrest the Judgment of Court is not an application contemplated by the rules of Court including the Court of Appeal Rules. The question that needs to be answered in the determination of this application is whether it is one that seeks to arrest the Judgment of this Court in Appeal No. CA/1/198/2008…, the question now is whether the present application operates as a stay of the Judgment of this Court or whether the grounds therein raises an objection to the delivery of the Judgment for want of jurisdiction among other things. I have carefully gone through the grounds relied upon by the 3rd Respondent/Applicant. They do not contain any objection to the jurisdiction of this Court and no objection bordering on technical defects ex-facie the record of this Court is raised therein. The application is one seeking for the discretion of the Court extending time for the 3rd Respondent to file his Brief of Argument. It is not one for the arrest of Judgment as submitted by the Appellant. The fact that an application is made to a Court after Judgment is reserved does not ipso facto make it an application to arrest the Judgment of Court”.
b. Saving an Abuse of Court Process
It is further submitted that a Judgement of the Court can be arrested vide an application in order to prevent an abuse of Court process.
In case of Forgo Battery Company Ltd v. Adebayo & Anor (2014) LPELR -22530 (CA) held that :
“…The law is trite that our Rules of Court do not provide for arrest of judgment except may be where the process of the Court has been abused. It is the duty of every Court to prevent the abuse of its process and that is an exceptional circumstance under which the Court may arrest a judgment about to be delivered.”
Furthermore, it is significant to note that the Supreme Court in the case of Dingyadi v. INEC (No.1) (2010) 18 NWLR (Pt.1224) 1; (2010) 4-7 SC (Pt. 1) that the Supreme Court granted an order preventing the Court of Appeal from delivering Judgement pursuant to a election petition emanating from Sokoto filed in flagrant abuse of Court process.
5. Conclusion
From the above judicial authorities, it is safe to submit that it is not every application brought after a matter has been heard and reserved for Judgment, that will be adjudged as one seeking to arrest the Judgment of Court. In the other words, where the applicant’s prayer (s) or supplication (s), is that he should be heard and the applicant concretizes the said desire to be heard by filing the requisite processes or where a suit is in itself an abuse of Court process, the Court of Law will not crucify or slaughter such application in the undeserved alter of arrest of judgment but baptize same with verdict of merit.
Interested buyers are encouraged to place their orders and enquiries via:
0704 444 4777, 0704 444 4999, 0818 199 9888
Website: www.alexandernigeria.com
Reimagine your practice with the power of AI “...this is the only Nigerian book I know of on the topic.” — Ohio Books Ltd
Authored by Ben Ijeoma Adigwe, Esq., ACIArb (UK), LL.M, Dip. in Artificial Intelligence, Director, Delta State Ministry of Justice, Asaba, Nigeria.
Bonus:
Get a FREE eBook titled “How to Use the AI in Legalpedia and Law Pavilion” with every purchase.
How to Order: 📞 Call, Text, or WhatsApp: 08034917063 | 07055285878 📧 Email: benadigwe1@gmail.com 🌐 Website: www.benadigwe.com
Ebook Version: Access directly online at: https://selar.com/prv626
_______________________________________________________________________ [A MUST HAVE] Evidence Act Demystified With Recent And Contemporary Cases And Materials
The book, titled The Law of Torts in Nigeria: A Functional Approach, authored by Professor Hagler Sunny Okorie Ph.D and Ikeocha, Nathaniel Ngozi Esq, offers law students, practitioners, and academics a comprehensive guide to understanding and applying tort law in Nigerian courts. Interested buyers can place orders via the following contact numbers: 08028636615, 08037667945, 08032253813, or +234 902 196 2209.
