The Supreme Court in dismissing Ihedioha’s case, held that it lacked powers to sit on appeal in its own judgment.
![](https://thenigerialawyer.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/ELLAN.png")
![](https://thenigerialawyer.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/2026-Summer-IDRI-Masterclass.jpg")
The court held that the application by Ihedioha asking the court to set aside its judgment of January 14, 2020 on grounds of nullity was an invitation on the apex court to sit on appeal over its own judgment, which the court cannot do.
In the lead judgment delivered by Justice Kayode Ariwoola, the court held that granting the request of the applicants would open the flood gate by parties to all kinds of litigations.
Justice Nweze, in his dissent judgement, said he was satisfied that the judgement that declared Uzodinma winner was entered in error. He held that the apex court has a duty to in the interest of justice, set-aside its decision that was given in error.
According to his dissent opinion, Uzodinma MISLED the Supreme Court to give judgement in his favour. That he cannot benefit from an election he wanted invalidated. That he misled the court into awarding him victory. Finally ordered that he should return his Certificate of Return to INEC which shall be reissued to Ihedioha”.
It’s been noted that the major reason the Supreme Court failed to set aside the judgement was because the apex court was invited to sit on appeal over its own judgment, according to them and they appear not bothered whether or not it was misled to give the judgement they gave.
But for Justice Nweze, the invitation was not to sit on appeal over its judgement but to correct a judgement the court was misled to give. If that is the case as evident in the judgement of Jan. 14, 2020, one is compelled to define the word “misled” and the consequences of misleading the court. The word misled is defined by Cambridge dictionary as:
Causing someone to believe something that is not true. Put differently, obtaining by false pretense. This in law constitute fraud and fraud is defined in Stroud’s Judicial Dictionary 4th Edition Vol.2, as “something dishonest, morally and legally wrong”.See Bayse v. Rossborough 6 HI. Cas 48,49; RePatrick and Lyon Ltd. (1933) Clt 786.
The law is well settled, that once a court has delivered its decision on a matter, it ceases to be seized of the cases (functus officio), and it cannot re-open it for any purpose whatsoever except in appropriate and exceptional cases such as when judgment:
(a) was obtained by fraud or deceit;
(b) was a nullity;
(c) was given under a mistaken belief that the parties consented to it;
(d) was given in the absence of jurisdiction;
(e) the proceedings adopted was such as to deprive the decision or judgment of the character of a legitimate adjudication; or
(f) was rendered with fundamental irregularity.
These conditions apply to both the Supreme court and every other courts in Nigeria. The conditions stated above may have informed the decision in Adegoke Motors Ltd. v. Adesanya [1989] 13 NWLR (Pt.109) 250 at page 275A where Justice Oputa considered the powers of the Supreme Court to review its earlier decisions and said:
“We are final not because we are infallible; rather we are infallible because we are final. Justices of this Court are human-beings, capable of erring. It will certainly be short sighted arrogance not to accept this obvious truth. It is also true that this Court can do inestimable good through its wise decisions. Similarly, the Court can do incalculable harm through its mistakes. When therefore it appears to learned counsel that any decision of this Court has been given per incuriam, such counsel should have the boldness and courage to ask that such a decision be over-ruled. This Court has the power to over-rule itself (and has done so in the past) for it gladly accepts that it is far better to admit an error than to persevere in error”
The principle in Adegoke’s case, shows with due respect, that the Supreme court was wrong when it stated that the application by Ihedioha asking the court to set aside its judgment of January 14, 2020 on grounds of fraud, lack of jurisdiction and nullity was an invitation on the apex court to sit on appeal over its own judgment, which the court lacks the powers to do.
Pats-Acholonu JSC, in Broad Bank v Olawiyola_ [2005] 3 NWLR (Part 912) 434 (SC), 458F–H stated that; Judges should pursue substantive justice, not procedural exactitude. That Rules of court are made to enable the court meet the ends of justice. They are not immutable and cannot be construed in absolute terms. It is the duty of the court to use its powers to discover the true intent of the law and do justice.”
The Supreme Court again, has missed the opportunity to use its powers to discover the true intent of the law and to redeem itself from per incuriam decision but held tenaciously to a notorious principle that it has never been done, to aid fraud and illegality.
The father of judicial activism himself, Lord Denning, had in the celebrated case of Parker V Parker (1954) All E.R p.22 held that, “What is the argument on the other side? Only this that no case has been found in which it had been done before. The argument does not appeal to me in the least, if we never do anything which has not been done before we shall never get anywhere. The law will stand still whilst the rest of the whole world goes on. That will be bad for both.”
The law must not forget justice. Just like Hugo Young of the Sunday Times, wrote about Denning, ‘when all the raucous headlines about the Imo Governorship case have been forgotten, and the regrettable calamity has passed insignificantly into the dustbin, Justice Centus Nweze’s greatest dissent judgement will endure forever. He liberated and refused to enslave himself, he is indeed a beacon.’
O.G. Ogbom is a Port Harcourt based legal practitioner. A partner at Law Freight Attorneys., ogbomg@lawfreightattorneys.com.ng
The book also examines Nigeria's legal ecosystem, focusing on the LPELR and NBA AI Guidelines. As a bonus, every purchase comes with a FREE eBook titled: How to Use the AI Features in LegalPedia and LawPavilion.
Ohio Books Ltd praises the publication, stating:
"....this is the only Nigerian book I know of on the topic."
How to Order:
📞 Call, Text, or WhatsApp: 08034917063 | 07055285878
📧 Email: benadigwe1@gmail.com
🌎 Website: www.benadigwe.com
Ebook Version: Access it directly online at https://selar.com/prv626
Authored by Ben Ijeoma Adigwe Esq., ACIarb (UK), LL.M, Dip. in Artificial Intelligence, Director at the Delta State Ministry of Justice, Asaba, Nigeria.
_______________________________________________________________________
“Order Justice Omolaye-Ajileye’s Electronic Evidence Books Now” — Essential Guides On Evidence Act, Case Law And Digital Proof
Interested buyers are encouraged to place their orders and enquiries via:
0704 444 4777, 0704 444 4999, 0818 199 9888
Website: www.alexandernigeria.com
