Rules of Court

Rules of Court are meant to regulate and provide guidelines for the conduct of proceedings before the Court. They are meant to assist the Court in its primary function of dispensing justice to the parties. Where strict adherence to the rules will occasion injustice, the Court will lean in favour of doing substantial justice. See: PDP Vs INEC & Ors. (2012) LPELR-9724 (SC) @ 23 & 30 per Fabiyi & Rhodes-Vivour, JJSC: Abubakar Vs Yar'Adua (2008) ALL FWLR (Pt.404) 1409; UTC Vs Pamotei (1989) 2 NWLR (Pt.103) 244 @ 251.
The position of this Court on the need to do substantial justice was clearly stated in: Obiora Vs Osele (1986) 1 NWLR (Pt.97) 279 and Akpan Vs The State (1992) 6 NWLR (Pt.248) 439,

Furthermore, on the issue of filing of the Notice of Appeal at the Court below instead of the trial Court, which meant non compliance with the rules of the Court, I am of the firm view that, that should not prevent this Court from ensuring that justice is seen to be manifestly done. The rules of Court are no doubt, meant to be obeyed by all parties concerned and at all times, including the Courts. See; U.T.C Ltd. vs. Chief Pamotei (1989) 2 NWLR (Pt.103) 244 at 296 where this Court, per Belgore, JSC (as he then was later the CJN) opined as follows: "Rules of procedure are made for the convenience and orderly hearing of cases in Court. They are made to help the cause of justice and not defeat justice. The rules are therefore aids to the Court. For Court to read Rules in the absolute without recourse to the justice of the cause, to my mind, that will be making the Courts slavish to the Rules. This clearly is not the reasons of the Rules of Courts." See also, Olufeagba & Ors Vs. Abdur-Raheem & Ors (2009) 19 NWLR (Pt.1173 384; (2009) 11-12 (Pt.1) SCM 125; (2009) LPELR – 2613 (SC). Where strict compliance will also lead to injustice and unbearable delay, the Court is enjoined to waive strict compliance. In Obadiam Vs. Grae Uyigule & Anor (1986) 3 SC 39 at 40 this Court per Irikefe, CJN opined as follows:- "However, in the interest of justice and in order to save such time as would have been wasted by striking this appeal out hereby, we have decided to deem this as an application for leave to file the notice and grounds again out of time and this time before us so that this appeal may be properly pending before us, We have accordingly waived the requirement that the notice be filed in the Court below, that is, at the Court of Appeal. By doing this, we now have a situation where this appeal is now before us."