The judgment in ADEJUMO V. AGUMAGU (2015)
12NWLR (PT.1472) 1, was delivered by the Court of Appeal, Abuja
Division on the 12th March, 2015. Obande Festus
Ogbuinya, JCA who was one of the members of the Panel of Justices,
read the Leading Judgment.
Considering that this commentary pivots around the judgment of a
court, it is fitting that a look is taken, albeit briefly, of the
meaning of judgment and a couple of its appurtenant principles.
According to the Black’s Law Dictionary, 8th Edition at
page 858, judgment is “A court’s final determination of the rights
and obligations of the parties in a case” The earlier
4th Edition of the Black’s Law Dictionary is a bit more
elaborate, as according to it at page 977, judgment is “The
official and authentic decision of a court of justice upon the
respective rights and claims of the parties to an action or suit
therein litigated and submitted to its determination”.
The courts have elaborately outlined the essential features a
judgment must reflect in order to be standard, irrespective of the
approach of the particular Judge. In GRAND SYSTEMS
PETROLEUM LTD. V. ACCESS BANK PLC. (2015) 3NWLR (PT.1446)
317 at 347 – 348 paragraphs G-C, the Court of Appeal (placing
reliance on two Apex Court cases) enjoins that judgments of trial
courts and appellate courts respectively, should reflect the
following:-
Trial court;
- Making a brief statement of the type of action/offence being
adjudicated upon, - Setting out the claim/offence in full or in part,
- A review of the evidence led,
- Appraisal/evaluation of such evidence,
- Making findings of fact therefrom,
- Consideration of the legal submissions made and/or arising, and
findings of law on them, and - Conclusion, that is verdict/final decision/order(s).
Appellate court;
A good appellate court judgment should set out claims, brief
facts of the case, the decision of the trial court or lower
appellate court, the appellant’s complaints against the decision;
the submission of the counsel for the parties in the appeal; and
the decision of the appellate court in the appeal.
Both at the trial and appellate courts, writing is at the core
of the adjudicatory function of a Judge. Thus, Judges rely on their
ability to craft clear, concise, incisive and persuasive reasons to
ensure that their decisions are understood and accepted by the
litigants, lawyers, other courts and the general public. There are
no cast-iron rules on how a judgment should or should not be
written and this has been judicially acknowledged over the years.
In OGBA V. ONWUZO (2005) 14NWLR (Pt.945) 331, the
Supreme Court posited that judgment writing is an art by itself in
which every individual has his own peculiar style and method.
Similarly, the Court of Appeal in DUGERI V. VEE-NETWORKS
LTD. (2015) 2NWLR (Pt.1442) 30 at page 46 paragraph E,
stated that “every Judge has the exclusive liberty of adopting an
appropriate style of writing his judgment for as long as the
justice of the case was satisfied”.
Extrapolating from the above, which suffers and entitles a Judge
to elect his style of writing judgment, I therefore humbly seek to
broach Ogbuinya, JCA’s style of writing judgment in this commentary
with ADEJUMO V. AGUMAGU (Supra) as the focal case. It is
indeed worthwhile to point out hereabouts that His Lordship’s
Judgment accords sufficiently with the requirements of a standard
appellate judgment as already considered hereinabove.
From an examination of the Learned Jurist’s style of writing
judgment, his eloquence undoubtedly is topnotch. There is an
otherness in his style of writing as demonstrated in ADEJUMO V.
AGUMAGU (Supra) and this is manifest in his analysis of
the facts, and the appraisement and postulation of the relevant
principles of law with an uncanny incisiveness and pungence.
The incisiveness and pungence of his language reinforces the
solemness and authoritativeness of the law and by extension the
court pronouncing the law. Although understandably austere at times
in phraseology, as is typical of legalistic writings, he
nonetheless with his luxuriant vocabulary writes in a loftily
ringing prose with a piercing tone that leaves the reader in a
world of certitude as to what has been pronounced upon by the
court.
Illustrative of the above at page 28 paragraphs F-H is the
following passage which is also garnished with some imagery;
“The law, roundly frowns on this chameleonic character of
litigating parties. The law insists that a party must be consistent
in the presentation of his case, see … A party, perhaps, in a bid
to score victory or advantage is not allowed to change his case
like the oscillating pendulum in a wall clock. It is a defilement
of the law to indulge in such an unwholesome somersault practice. I
hold, taking shelter under the law, solidified by Garuba case, that
the decision of the lower court was interlocutory, not final as
vainly pontificated by the appellant”. Also at page 36
paragraph G, he rounded off on an issue thus; “In the absence
of closeness/oneness of facts in the two cases, I must dishonour
the inciting invitation of the appellant to crucify the lower
court’s decision on the alter of stare
decisis”.
Though the Learned Jurist did not resolve any novel legal issue
in ADEJUMO V. AGUMAGU (Supra) and this is because the case
itself did not turn on any. He adjudicatorily resolved all the
inviting legal issues, recondite or otherwise, essentially guided
by enrooted states of the law. However, the fascinating bit is that
his unique writing style infuses freshness in his apparent
restatement of already trite principles of law. He restates already
trite principles of law devoid of the attendant triteness and
staleness. He does not just regurgitate a principle of law, rather
he freshens it up the moment it goes under the tip of his juridical
pen, via his skillful style of writing, and he does this without
derailing any inch from the principle’s original purport and
context.
Restating the enrooted principles of law on stare
decisis and on the literal rule of interpretation, he
proceeded thus respectively at page 36 paragraph F and page 35
paragraph B; “The doctrine of stare decisis, which ensures
certainty in any legal system, thrives where facts of cases are on
all fours. It is lame where the facts of cases are
irreconcilable.”; and “According to the law, they must be
accorded their ordinary meanings without any interpolations or
distortions.” Re-echoing the trite principle of law on a
ground of appeal that requires leave of court, he went thus at page
29 paragraph B; “An appeal on fair hearing which is spiced with
mixed law and facts requires the leave of court.”
The foregoing said, let me briefly recount here a surreal
encounter I had with the Learned Jurist, though not in flesh but
rather on the pages of his writings. Held spellbound by the Learned
Jurist’s masterly and sophisticated eloquence during my initial
reading of his Judgment in ADEJUMO V. AGUMAGU (Supra), I
can recall momentarily pausing when I came across the line “…
marooned in the intractable vortex of nullity …” (at page
30, paragraph B) in his resolution of a jurisdictional issue. The
line seemingly aroused a sense of familiarity, and after a quick
rear viewing, the puzzle as to the source of the familiarity was
solved, as it turned out eventually, it stemmed interestingly from
an earlier reading of his book, UNDERSTANDING THE CONCEPT OF
JURISDICTION IN THE NIGERIAN LEGAL SYSTEM (2008). While
expertly doing justice to the subject of jurisdiction in the book,
the Learned Jurist being emphatic, had previously remarked
variantly (at page 71 of the book) thus; “… enmeshed in the
intricate web of nullity …”.
It was a really gratifying experience for me, learning of the
unary authorship by the Learned Jurist of the Leading Judgment in
ADEJUMO V. AGUMAGU (Supra) and the book, not from his name
but from the commonality of the DNA in the above two lines.
Noticeable in his style of (expressing his thoughts in) writing is
this verve that customarily runs through, fluidly.
In a commentary such as this, extolling skillfulness in judgment
writing by judicial officers, what case’s judgment can be more
suitable for this endeavour than ADEJUMO V. AGUMAGU
(Supra) wherein the parties themselves are/were eminent
judicial officers. The Appellant in this case (Hon. Justice
Babatunde Adejumo) is the President, National Industrial Court of
Nigeria, while the 1st Respondent (Hon. Justice P.N.C.
Agumagu) was the President, Customary Court of Appeal, Rivers State
and later appointed as the Acting Chief Judge of Rivers State,
which appointment in 2014 catalyzed a chain of events. It was one
of such events that culminated in the suit that birthed the appeal
in ADEJUMO V. AGUMAGU (Supra).
This conversation, most humbly, is aimed at encouraging our
respected Judges both at the trial and appellate courts to not
relent at contriving skillfully written judgments as Their
Lordships are still doing, no matter the odds. It is these
skillfully written judgments that qualitatively enrich our
literature of judgments in particular and our legal literature in
general. It is these skillfully written judgments that make reading
of judgments profitable and memorable exercises. It is these
skillfully written judgments that stand quotable and quoted for
ages. It is these skillfully written judgments, paraphrasing Prof.
Awa Kalu, SAN, that continue to cut and shape the text and
texture of our laws.
A studied glance of the judgments and writings of past and
present Judges of our clime’s trial and appellate courts,
convincingly shows that a dazzling array of Judges with masterly
and sophisticated eloquence, have eminently graced the bench in the
past and still grace the bench today. The skillful erudition,
illumination and postulations of legal principles by Their
Lordships of yesteryears helped lay the foundational bricks that
underpin our body of laws today, therefore, Their Lordships of
today are highly commended and humbly encouraged to relentlessly
continue with their good works of churning out skillfully written
judgments.
Alaware Preye Isaac, Esq. a Private Legal Practitioner, is an
Associate Counsel in the Law Firm of Timi Ambaiowei &
Associates, in Yenagoa, Bayelsa State, Nigeria.
He can be reached via; isaacalaware@gmail.com
The judgment in ADEJUMO V. AGUMAGU (2015)
12NWLR (PT.1472) 1, was delivered by the Court of Appeal, Abuja
Division on the 12th March, 2015. Obande Festus
Ogbuinya, JCA who was one of the members of the Panel of Justices,
read the Leading Judgment.
Considering that this commentary pivots around the judgment of a
court, it is fitting that a look is taken, albeit briefly, of the
meaning of judgment and a couple of its appurtenant principles.
According to the Black’s Law Dictionary, 8th Edition at
page 858, judgment is “A court’s final determination of the rights
and obligations of the parties in a case” The earlier
4th Edition of the Black’s Law Dictionary is a bit more
elaborate, as according to it at page 977, judgment is “The
official and authentic decision of a court of justice upon the
respective rights and claims of the parties to an action or suit
therein litigated and submitted to its determination”.
The courts have elaborately outlined the essential features a
judgment must reflect in order to be standard, irrespective of the
approach of the particular Judge. In GRAND SYSTEMS
PETROLEUM LTD. V. ACCESS BANK PLC. (2015) 3NWLR (PT.1446)
317 at 347 – 348 paragraphs G-C, the Court of Appeal (placing
reliance on two Apex Court cases) enjoins that judgments of trial
courts and appellate courts respectively, should reflect the
following:-
Trial court;
- Making a brief statement of the type of action/offence being
adjudicated upon, - Setting out the claim/offence in full or in part,
- A review of the evidence led,
- Appraisal/evaluation of such evidence,
- Making findings of fact therefrom,
- Consideration of the legal submissions made and/or arising, and
findings of law on them, and - Conclusion, that is verdict/final decision/order(s).
Appellate court;
A good appellate court judgment should set out claims, brief
facts of the case, the decision of the trial court or lower
appellate court, the appellant’s complaints against the decision;
the submission of the counsel for the parties in the appeal; and
the decision of the appellate court in the appeal.
Both at the trial and appellate courts, writing is at the core
of the adjudicatory function of a Judge. Thus, Judges rely on their
ability to craft clear, concise, incisive and persuasive reasons to
ensure that their decisions are understood and accepted by the
litigants, lawyers, other courts and the general public. There are
no cast-iron rules on how a judgment should or should not be
written and this has been judicially acknowledged over the years.
In OGBA V. ONWUZO (2005) 14NWLR (Pt.945) 331, the
Supreme Court posited that judgment writing is an art by itself in
which every individual has his own peculiar style and method.
Similarly, the Court of Appeal in DUGERI V. VEE-NETWORKS
LTD. (2015) 2NWLR (Pt.1442) 30 at page 46 paragraph E,
stated that “every Judge has the exclusive liberty of adopting an
appropriate style of writing his judgment for as long as the
justice of the case was satisfied”.
Extrapolating from the above, which suffers and entitles a Judge
to elect his style of writing judgment, I therefore humbly seek to
broach Ogbuinya, JCA’s style of writing judgment in this commentary
with ADEJUMO V. AGUMAGU (Supra) as the focal case. It is
indeed worthwhile to point out hereabouts that His Lordship’s
Judgment accords sufficiently with the requirements of a standard
appellate judgment as already considered hereinabove.
From an examination of the Learned Jurist’s style of writing
judgment, his eloquence undoubtedly is topnotch. There is an
otherness in his style of writing as demonstrated in ADEJUMO V.
AGUMAGU (Supra) and this is manifest in his analysis of
the facts, and the appraisement and postulation of the relevant
principles of law with an uncanny incisiveness and pungence.
The incisiveness and pungence of his language reinforces the
solemness and authoritativeness of the law and by extension the
court pronouncing the law. Although understandably austere at times
in phraseology, as is typical of legalistic writings, he
nonetheless with his luxuriant vocabulary writes in a loftily
ringing prose with a piercing tone that leaves the reader in a
world of certitude as to what has been pronounced upon by the
court.
Illustrative of the above at page 28 paragraphs F-H is the
following passage which is also garnished with some imagery;
“The law, roundly frowns on this chameleonic character of
litigating parties. The law insists that a party must be consistent
in the presentation of his case, see … A party, perhaps, in a bid
to score victory or advantage is not allowed to change his case
like the oscillating pendulum in a wall clock. It is a defilement
of the law to indulge in such an unwholesome somersault practice. I
hold, taking shelter under the law, solidified by Garuba case, that
the decision of the lower court was interlocutory, not final as
vainly pontificated by the appellant”. Also at page 36
paragraph G, he rounded off on an issue thus; “In the absence
of closeness/oneness of facts in the two cases, I must dishonour
the inciting invitation of the appellant to crucify the lower
court’s decision on the alter of stare
decisis”.
Though the Learned Jurist did not resolve any novel legal issue
in ADEJUMO V. AGUMAGU (Supra) and this is because the case
itself did not turn on any. He adjudicatorily resolved all the
inviting legal issues, recondite or otherwise, essentially guided
by enrooted states of the law. However, the fascinating bit is that
his unique writing style infuses freshness in his apparent
restatement of already trite principles of law. He restates already
trite principles of law devoid of the attendant triteness and
staleness. He does not just regurgitate a principle of law, rather
he freshens it up the moment it goes under the tip of his juridical
pen, via his skillful style of writing, and he does this without
derailing any inch from the principle’s original purport and
context.
Restating the enrooted principles of law on stare
decisis and on the literal rule of interpretation, he
proceeded thus respectively at page 36 paragraph F and page 35
paragraph B; “The doctrine of stare decisis, which ensures
certainty in any legal system, thrives where facts of cases are on
all fours. It is lame where the facts of cases are
irreconcilable.”; and “According to the law, they must be
accorded their ordinary meanings without any interpolations or
distortions.” Re-echoing the trite principle of law on a
ground of appeal that requires leave of court, he went thus at page
29 paragraph B; “An appeal on fair hearing which is spiced with
mixed law and facts requires the leave of court.”
The foregoing said, let me briefly recount here a surreal
encounter I had with the Learned Jurist, though not in flesh but
rather on the pages of his writings. Held spellbound by the Learned
Jurist’s masterly and sophisticated eloquence during my initial
reading of his Judgment in ADEJUMO V. AGUMAGU (Supra), I
can recall momentarily pausing when I came across the line “…
marooned in the intractable vortex of nullity …” (at page
30, paragraph B) in his resolution of a jurisdictional issue. The
line seemingly aroused a sense of familiarity, and after a quick
rear viewing, the puzzle as to the source of the familiarity was
solved, as it turned out eventually, it stemmed interestingly from
an earlier reading of his book, UNDERSTANDING THE CONCEPT OF
JURISDICTION IN THE NIGERIAN LEGAL SYSTEM (2008). While
expertly doing justice to the subject of jurisdiction in the book,
the Learned Jurist being emphatic, had previously remarked
variantly (at page 71 of the book) thus; “… enmeshed in the
intricate web of nullity …”.
It was a really gratifying experience for me, learning of the
unary authorship by the Learned Jurist of the Leading Judgment in
ADEJUMO V. AGUMAGU (Supra) and the book, not from his name
but from the commonality of the DNA in the above two lines.
Noticeable in his style of (expressing his thoughts in) writing is
this verve that customarily runs through, fluidly.
In a commentary such as this, extolling skillfulness in judgment
writing by judicial officers, what case’s judgment can be more
suitable for this endeavour than ADEJUMO V. AGUMAGU
(Supra) wherein the parties themselves are/were eminent
judicial officers. The Appellant in this case (Hon. Justice
Babatunde Adejumo) is the President, National Industrial Court of
Nigeria, while the 1st Respondent (Hon. Justice P.N.C.
Agumagu) was the President, Customary Court of Appeal, Rivers State
and later appointed as the Acting Chief Judge of Rivers State,
which appointment in 2014 catalyzed a chain of events. It was one
of such events that culminated in the suit that birthed the appeal
in ADEJUMO V. AGUMAGU (Supra).
This conversation, most humbly, is aimed at encouraging our
respected Judges both at the trial and appellate courts to not
relent at contriving skillfully written judgments as Their
Lordships are still doing, no matter the odds. It is these
skillfully written judgments that qualitatively enrich our
literature of judgments in particular and our legal literature in
general. It is these skillfully written judgments that make reading
of judgments profitable and memorable exercises. It is these
skillfully written judgments that stand quotable and quoted for
ages. It is these skillfully written judgments, paraphrasing Prof.
Awa Kalu, SAN, that continue to cut and shape the text and
texture of our laws.
A studied glance of the judgments and writings of past and
present Judges of our clime’s trial and appellate courts,
convincingly shows that a dazzling array of Judges with masterly
and sophisticated eloquence, have eminently graced the bench in the
past and still grace the bench today. The skillful erudition,
illumination and postulations of legal principles by Their
Lordships of yesteryears helped lay the foundational bricks that
underpin our body of laws today, therefore, Their Lordships of
today are highly commended and humbly encouraged to relentlessly
continue with their good works of churning out skillfully written
judgments.
Alaware Preye Isaac, Esq. a Private Legal Practitioner, is an
Associate Counsel in the Law Firm of Timi Ambaiowei &
Associates, in Yenagoa, Bayelsa State, Nigeria.
He can be reached via; isaacalaware@gmail.com