WHETHER A REPLY BRIEF CAN USHER IN NEW POINT OF ARGUMENT
Saheed Afeez Ayinde
The court in this matter had painstakingly clarify the mix up roles attached to “Reply Brief” that is usually made by the Appellant in response to The Respondent.
In this case, counsel to the Appellant had raise a new point in his “Reply Brief” in order to Corroborate and amend the Lacuna in his initial Brief served to the Respondent.
Hence, the court had called the attention of the parties and remove the offshoots as observed in the cited case below;
LT. COLONEL P. Y. AWUSA V. NIGERIAN ARMY LOR 4:5:2018 SC
as per AMINA ADAMU AUGIE, J.S.C. (Delivering the Leading Judgement)
This is totally unacceptable because as I said: “a reply brief is not a repair kit to put right any lacuna or error in Appellants Brief” Mozie V. Mbamalu (supra).
A reply brief is not the forum for the Appellant to strengthen his main Brief by repeating or expanding the arguments contained therein; not to mention the introduction of fresh arguments that should have been made in the main brief. In effect, a reply brief does not open the door for the Appellant to take a second bite at the cherry; he will not be permitted to do so.
Islamist || Educational || Motivational || Legal || Public Speaker || Professional || Activist ||