CHIEF (HON.) NKWO NNABUCHI & ORS V. I.G.P. & ORS (2025) 8 NWLR (PT. 1993) 495
ON MEANING OF OBITER DICTUM
An obiter is a Judge’s passing remarks which have nothing to do with the live issues for determination in the matter. It is the statement of the Judge by the way. In the principles of stare decisis, an obiter is not binding. Unlike ratio, it has no binding force but it has a persuasive force. In the present case, the comment/remark of the Court of Appeal on the concurrent and coordinate jurisdiction of both the Federal and High Courts to adjudicate on issues of fundamental rights cannot translate ratio decidendi to form an appealable issue before the court. Thus, the issue was predicated on an obiter dictum and same was incompetent. [Nwana v.F.C.D.A. (2004) 13 NWLR (Pt. 889) 128 referred to.](Pp. 511-512, paras. H-C)
CHIEF (HON.) NKWO NNABUCHI & ORS V. I.G.P. & ORS (2025) 8 NWLR (PT. 1993) 495
ON WHAT OBITER DICTUM ENTAILS
Obiter dictum entails comments or passing remarks by a Judge or court, or its observation(s) which is certainly not meant to be the principle or the basis upon which the decision of the court is based or hinged on. It is simply an observation or a mere passing remark or comment. Such remark, comment, or observation(s) is no doubt not meant to play any part in the decision the court arrives at in its judgment. In the instant case, it is clear that the portion of the judgment that the appellants were unhappy with and against which they have appealed were a mere passing remark of the Court of Appeal and not the principle or the basis upon which the decision of the court was based. They were obiter dictum. [Omisore v. Aregbesola (2015)15 NWLR (Pt. 1482) 205, Atanda v. Commissioner, Lands and Housing, Kwara State (2018) 1 NWLR(Pt. 1599) 32; Kente v. Bwacha (2023) 9 NWLR (Pt.1889) 329; Onagoruwa v. State (1993) 7 NWLR (Pt.303) 49 referred to.] (Pp. 509, paras. C-E; 509-510,paras. H-A)
CHIEF (HON.) NKWO NNABUCHI & ORS V. I.G.P. & ORS (2025) 8 NWLR (PT. 1993) 495
ON DISTINCTION BETWEEN RATIO DECIDENDI AND OBITER DICTUM
The concept of ratio decidendi and obiter dictum was developed under the doctrine of judicial precedent to distinguish the portion of the judgment of a higher court that is binding on a lower court from the portion of the judgment that is not binding. The ratio decidendi in a case represents the legal reasoning or principle or ground upon which a case is decided. An appeal can only lie against the ratio decidendi. On the other hand, an obiter dictum means the opinion of the court which does not embody the resolution of the court. An obiter dictum cannot be the basis for a reversal of a decision, and any appeal or ground of appeal predicated thereon would be liable to be struck out. [Okpeji v. Minister of Agriculture (1997) 9 NWLR (Pt. 522) 693, University Press Ltd. v. I. K. Martins (Nig.) Ltd. (2000) 4 NWLR(Pt. 654) 584, Ibrahim v. Fulani (2010) 17 NWLR (Pt.1222) 241; Odunukwe v. Ofomata (2010) 18 NWLR(Pt. 1225) 404; Ogbaru L.G. v. Ifeachor (2023) 15NWLR (Pt. 1906) 99; Amadi v. Wopara (20 22) 1NWLR (Pt. 1811) 359; Buhari v. Obasanjo (2003)17 NWLR (Pt. 850) 587; Orugbo v. Una (2002) 16NWLR (Pt.792) 175 referred to.] (Pp. 508, paras.F-G; 512, paras. E-G; 513, paras. A-B)
CHIEF (HON.) NKWO NNABUCHI & ORS V. I.G.P. & ORS (2025) 8 NWLR (PT. 1993) 495
ON WHETHER APPEAL LIES AGAINST OBITER DICTUM
An appeal does not lie against an obiter dictum of the lower court. An appeal or ground of appeal against mere obiter dictum is incompetent. Where an opinion or remark is expressed by a Judge and such an opinion amounts to nothing and is baseless, it is not appealable. In the instant case, the appeal was directed at a passing remark of the Court of Appeal. It was therefore, a misuse and abuse of the processes of the court. It was incompetent and was struck out. [Agbabiaka v. F.B.N. Plc (2020) 6 NWLR(Pt. 1719) 77; Umar v. F.R.N. (2021) 4 NWLR (Pt.1766) 291; Abba v. Abba-Aji (2022) 11 NWLR(Pt. 1842) 535; Ado (Dangajere) v. State (2017) 15NWLR (Pt. 1587) 65; National Democratic Party v.I.N.E.C. (2013) 6 NWLR (Pt 1350) 392 referred to.](Pp. 510-511, paras. F-C)