Notice

I must point out in respect of Issue One that the Courts are agreed that a pre-action notice is a procedural requirement of jurisdiction and not a substantive matter of jurisdiction.

Where a Respondent is not comfortable with a finding, not the entire Judgment, which he considers fundamental, he can challenge same by filing a cross-appeal – Cameroon Airlines V. Otutuizu (2011) 4 NWLR (Pt. 1238) 512, Obi V. INEC (2007) 11 NWLR (Pt. 1046) 565. Where the Respondent supports the judgment, but wants it affirmed on grounds other than those relied upon by the Court, he must then file a Respondent's Notice – Kayili V. Yilbruk (2015) LPELR-24323(SC).
Without a cross-appeal or Respondent's Notice, he will not be allowed to attack the judgment, and the effect of violating this rule is that arguments in his brief in support of the Appellant will be ignored – see Obi V. INEC(supra).

Order 8 Rule 6 (1) Supreme Court Rules as amended provides for the unilateral withdrawal of an appeal by an appellant. For the rule to apply the following conditions must co-exist:
(a) There must be an appeal by the appellant;
(b) There must be a withdrawal of the appeal in the words of Form 19 or 20 or such words indicating that there is no intention to further prosecute the appeal;
(c) The withdrawal may be at any time before the appeal is called on for hearing;
(d) Notice of the withdrawal must be served on all parties to the appeal
(e) The notice of withdrawal must be filed with the registrar."
See: Dingyadi Vs INEC (No.2) (2011) 18 NWLR (Pt.1224) 154 @ 205 – 206 H C; Edozien Vs Edozien (1993) 1 NWLR (Pt. 272) 678 @ 699: Adeagbo Vs Yusuf (1990) 6 NWLR (Pt.158) 588.
For the Notice of Withdrawal to be competent under Rule 6 (1) above, all the parties to the appeal must consent to the withdrawal either by filing documents to that effect directly or, through their legal representatives in which case the appeal is deemed dismissed.
However, Rule 6 (4) provides that where all the parties do not consent to the withdrawal, it shall remain on the cause list to abide the discretion of the Court thereafter. See: Dingyadi vs INEC (No.2) (Supra) @ 206 C-E; In Re Nwude (1993) 3 NWLR (Pt.282) 492; Akuneziri vs Okenwa (2000) 15 NWLR (Pt.691) 526. The appeal shall remain on the list for the hearing of any issue as to costs or otherwise outstanding between the parties and for the making of an order as to the disposal of any sum lodged in Court as security for the costs of appeal.