PROCEDURAL STEPS ON ASSESSMENT AND VERIFICATION IN FILING COURT PROCESSES IN THE FCT
HIGH COURT OF THE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY, ABUJA. PROCEDURAL STEPS
ACTION – NIGERIAN CASES ON LITIGATION/PRACTICE/PROCEDURE ISSUES – 2
POLICY, PRACTICE & PUBLISHING LAW REPORTS, 3PLR
[Judgment(s) are listed and published here for free but can procured in electronic PDF copies for a fee in singles or compendium. Research support is also available. Email us through lawnigeria@gmail.com and info@lawnigeria.com or text 07067102097]
| TITLE | MAIN ISSUES |
| AKINBI V. MILITARY GOVERNOR, ONDO STATE | ACTION:- Justiciability of an action ‑ How determined |
| AKINDE V. ADELUSOLA | ACTION:- Duty of plaintiff to set out the relief sought in clear terms in his claim. |
| AKINFOSILE V. MOBIL OIL (NIG.) LTD | |
| AKINNUBI V. AKINNUBI | ACTION:- Commencement of action – Action by infant – How commenced – How infant may sue.
ACTION:- Parties to an action – Capacity in which party sued or suing – Power of court to amend -Where derived -Extent and scope of-Principles guiding. ACTION:- Parties to an action -Capacity in which infant may institute proceedings. |
| AKINSANYA V. AKINLAGUN | ACTION:- Civil Action – – Landlord and Tenant – Possession – Rightly granted on ground that monthly tenant in arrears for 30 months – A bad tenant’ notwithstanding his payment of arrears in 2 instalments, after bringing of action. |
| AKINSETE V. AKINSETE | |
| AKINTOLA V. LASUPO | ACTION:- Claim for injunction – Whether only follows a finding of liability for trespass – Proof of possession of land – Planting of short term crops instead of perennial economic crops – Relevance |
| AKINTUNDE V. OYEDOYIN AND OTHERS. | ACTION:- Defendants sued in personal capacity – Defendant admitting in pleading that he was sued in representative capacity on behalf of family – No objection taken in address of defendant’s counsel – Whether too late for defendant to raise issue of representation on appeal. |
| AKINWUNMI V. IDEWU | ACTION:- Civil Procedure – Action: to set aside consent judgment – Mistake not pleaded but even if it were consent judgment could not be set aside for unilateral mistake – No representation order for defendants before consent judgment but bound by their conduct. |
| AKINWUNMI V. OLUDIPE | ACTION:- Civil Action – Action for declaration of title after time when existing court order, not appealed against, prohibited it – Should have been struck out and not declared on merits. |
| AKINYEMI V. SOYANWO | ACTION:- Parties to an action – Whether bound to obey Court decisions which they consider to be irregular or illegal. |
| AKPAGBUE AND ANOTHER V. OGU AND OTHERS | ACTION – LAND LAW – Consolidated Action – Declaration of title to land – Damages for trespass – Perpetual Injunction – Recovery of possession under Customary tenure – Traditional history of land – Evidence of acts of ownership – Forfeiture of Customary tenancy. |
| AKPAN V. UDO UTIN |
ACTION:- Parties to an action – “Privy” – Meaning of. ACTION:- Parties to an action -Parties in relation to estoppel per rem judicatam -Meaning of. |
| AKUMOJU V. AKANO MOSADOLORUN |
ACTION:- Death of defendant before judgment but after close of evidence – Effect. ACTION:- Maxim’ actin personalis moritur cum person’ (meaning that a personal right of action (does not survive death) -Applicable principles-Exception thereto ACTION:- Parties – Suit by or against a party – Need for either party to be a living persona. |
| AKUNNIA V. A-G. ANAMBRA STATE AND OTHERS | ACTION:- Civil Action – Originating notice of motion – If appropriate to apply to have matter in difference. |
| ALAHASSAN & ANOR V. MR. DARIUS DICKSON ISHAKU & ORS |
ACTION:- PLEADINGS:- Purpose/Aim of pleadings – Whether parties and courts are bound by their pleadings – Effect of defective pleadings – Whether parties can set out a case at variance with pleadings ACTION:- CLAIM(S)/RELIEF(S):- Whether Court can grant relief not sought ACTION:- LOCUS STANDI: Purpose of rule of locus standi – When a party will be deemed to have locus standi ACTION:- CONSISTENCY IN PRESENTATION OF A CASE: Need for a party to be consistent in the presentation and proof of his case |
| ALAMIEYESEIGHA V. CHIEF SATURDAY TEIWA | ACTION:- Commencement of action – Locus standi therefor – Source Of. |
| ALAMU V. ALAO AND OTHERS | ACTION:- Civil Action – – Death of party before appeal – Counsel seeking order to set aside appellate court judgment or to substitute deceased – Duty to inform court long before judgment. |
| ALAO V. FARO | ACTION:- Action for trespass on goods alleged by plaintiff-Case filed in magistrate’s court—Defendant raising preliminary objection to suit on ground of jurisdiction—Allegation that land on which goods are stacked is subject-matter of action in High Court-Writ put in evidence-Magistrate striking out suit for want of jurisdiction-Justification or otherwise of decision. |
| ALAPIKI V. THE GOVERNOR OF RIVERS STATE | ACTION:- Action against an office – Nature of |
| ALAWODE V. SEMOH |
ACTION – LIMITATION:- Civil Action – Limitation of Actions – Fatal Accidents Act 1846 – When applicable ACTION:- Test for the commencement of an action both according to the English rules and the local Rules of Court – “Has the plaintiff done all that is required of him by law to commence his action?” – Legal implications – Need to determine same by considering relevant statutes and rules/practices of court in the relevant jurisdiction – Whether from the time a plaintiff, in Nigeria, delivers his application to the Registrar (provided it is not an action in which the consent of the Court is necessary before the writ is issued), and he pays the necessary fees, it will be correct to say that an action or a suit has been “commenced” – Where delay occasioned before the issue of the writ is a matter not within the power of the plaintiff to control but merely a domestic affair of the Court – Whether improper for the plaintiff to be penalised |
| ALEXANDER MARINE MANAGEMENT V. KODA INTERNATIONAL LTD | ACTION:- Admiralty action (Right of appeal) |
| ALFA KAMORU SALAWU V. MRS. Z. S. ADEBANKE & ANOR | ACTION – WRIT OF ATTACHMENT: Purpose of a writ of attachment – whether one issued before the expiration of the prescribed 15 days window period is done in futility – duty of a court to set aside a wrongful or irregular execution of a writ of attachment |
| ALFRED C. TOEPFER INC. OF NEW YORK V. EDOKPOLOR | |
| ALHAJI ABDULLAHI ATANDA KOLAWOLE V. ALHAJI SALAMI ADISA OLORI |
ACTION – CAUSE OF ACTION: Distinction between a cause of action said to be statute barred and the cause of action ab initio not justiciable in law ACTION – CAUSE OF ACTION: How to determine when a cause of action arose |
| ALHAJI ABDULLAHI BAIDO AND MADUNKA INTERNATIONAL LTD V. ALHAJI SIKIRU USMAN | ACTION:– Parties to an action – where respondent failed to participate in an action – whether appellant can succeed on the strength of his case. |
| ALHAJI AL-MUSTAPHA HARUNA JOKOLO V. GOVERNOR OF KEBBI STATE & ORS. | ACTION – NECESSARY PARTY: Who is a necessary party to a suit |
| ALHAJI BURAIMO OLAGBAJU & ANOR. V. FATAI ABASS | ACTION – CAPACITY TO SUE: Whether it is necessary for a party to state the capacity he is suing |
| ALHAJI GANIYU OLAYIWOLA FAGBOHUN & ANOR V. MOMODU SABA IGANNA & ORS | ACTION:- Trial Court – Evaluation Of Evidence – Primary role of trial court – Justification – Duty of trial court to thoroughly examine evidence before making any decision – Assignment of weight to pieces – Governing principle – Whether trial court needs to evaluate the totality of the evidence – What a trial court needs to consider before coming to its final conclusion based on the evidence which it has accepted |
| ALHAJI I.A ONIBUDO & ORS V. ALHAJI A.W AKIBU & ORS | ACTION:- Pleadings – Provisions made, in lieu of the old procedure of Demurrer which in most cases have been abolished – Peremptory disposal of cases at the close of plaintiff’s statement of claim or at the close of both the plaintiff’s and defendant’s pleadings – Power of the Court to to dismiss the plaintiff’s case, or the defence, or strike out the pleadings of either the plaintiff or the defendant or both, or act upon any point of law on which the Court is satisfied the case may be disposed of, either in part or in whole – Whether the Court may do this, and often does this, without hearing any evidence – Effect |
| ALHAJI IBRAHIM SHEKA V. ALHAJI UMARU BASHARI | ACTION:- Need for a party to be consistent in the case he presents in court via his pleadings, the evidence of his witnesses at trial and submissions of his Counsel |
| ALHAJI LAWAL DARMA V. ALHAJI MAIWADA BATAGARAWA | ACTION – REPLY TO STATEMENT OF DEFENCE: When a plaintiff will need to file reply to averment in a statement of defence |
| ALHAJI MOHAMMED MAHDI ABUBAKAR V. BEBEJI OIL AND ALLIED PRODUCTS LTD | |
| ALHAJI MUHAMMADU MAIGARI DINGYADI V. INDEPENDENT NATIONAL ELECTORAL COMMISSION | ACTION – on vacation of action where two actions of similar or same nature and between same parties and subject matter are being prosecuted concurrently before same court or different courts |
| ALHAJI MUSA ALUBANKUDI V. ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF THE FEDERATION & ANOR | ACTION:- ORIGINATING SUMMONS: What is required where a fresh question is raised after the questions raised initially in originating summons have been exhausted or answered by court |
| ALHAJI NURUDEEN OLUFUNMISE V. MRS. ABIOLA LABINJOH FALANA |
ACTION:- Action for setting aside a judgment on ground of fraud – How brought – Whether by action or by motion for a new trial – Whether a judgment can only be set aside if at all against those who procured it by fraud – Exemptions – Whether probate action to set aside probate of a will is exempted ACTION OF DECIET:- Whether silence is not a ground in law for an action of deceit although it may act as an estoppel and thereby deny a remedy – Whether to be actionable, the plaintiff and in appropriate cases, the court must have been influenced by the misrepresentation and that it was a material representation |
| ALHAJI RABIU NUNKU V. JOHN AYA & ANOR | ACTION:- Standard of proof in civil cases – How discharged |
| ALHAJI RAUFU GBADAMOSI V. OLAITAN DAIRO, ALHAJI RAIMI AFOLABI | |
| ALHAJI RAZAK ADENIYI AYILARA V. FEDERAL MINISTRY OF WORKS | ACTION – PLEADINGS: Whether before a party can legally rely on fraud as a defence, the fact of fraud must be pleaded and particulars thereof must be provided in the pleadings |
| ALHAJI S. A. KAZEEM V. MADAM WEMIMO MOSAKU | |
| ALHAJI SAIBU V. YEKINI OTUN | |
| ALHAJI SANNI SHAIBU V. J.O. BAKARE |
ACTION – PLEADINGS: Whether the trial court has a duty to reject evidence which is contrary to the pleadings ACTION – PLEADINGS: Whether parties are bound by their pleadings ACTION – PLEADINGS: Whether the evidence must be in line with the pleadings and go to prove the averments in the pleadings. |
| ALHAJI SHEHU BAKULE V. TANEREWA NIGERIA LIMITED | ACTION – COURT – APPELLATE JURISDICTION OF THE COURT OF APPEAL: Nature of Appellate jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal |
| ALHAJI SURAKATU I. AMIDA & ORS. V. TAIYE OSHOBOJA |
ACTION – REPRESENTATIVE ACTION: Whether failure to obtain approval of the court to act in a representative capacity will vitiate a judgment ACTION – REPRESENTATIVE ACTION: Can the court of appeal afflict a person with the status of a representative capacity where representation was sought and refused by the trial court? |
| ALHAJI UMARU LAUNI V. GODI G.E.O. EZEADUA | |
| ALHAJI YUSUF DAN HAUSA & CO. LTD V. PANATRADE LTD |
ACTION:- Counter-Claim – Trial of in absence of defendant – Options open to court. ACTION:- Counter-claim – Plaintiff absent and defendant having counter-claim – Plaintiff s case struck out – What court should do before proceeding with counter-claim. |
| ALL PROGRESSIVES CONGRESS v. PEOPLES DEMOCRATIC PARTY & ORS | ACTION: Necessary Part –Meaning – effect of excluding a necessary party to a proceeding
ACTION – REPLY: Meaning thereof – lawful limits of a reply |
| ALLI V. ALLEN | ACTION – LIMITATION OF ACTION- Recovery of debt -Time to bring action -Section 30, Money Lenders Act, 1958 – Non compliance with – Effect. |
| ALLOYSIUS AKPAJI V. FRANCIS UDEMBA | ACTION – PLEADINGS: Effect of failure to file defence or a Reply to counter-claim – Whether success of Plaintiff claim renders the counter-claim useless
ACTION – FILING FEES:- When to raise objection to default in filing fee – When deemed as touching on issue of jurisdiction – Proper treatment |
| ALLOYSIUS EGEMOLE V. OSITA OGUEKWE & ORS. | ACTION – JOINDER OF PARTIES: Whether a party can by motion seek to be joined as a co-defendant after judgment had been delivered |
| AMADI V. POOL HOUSE GROUP(NIGERIA) LTD | CIVIL ACTION |
| AMADI V. THOMAS APLIN | ACTION:- Amendment of Statement of Claim – Dismissal of motion without hearing |
| AMAEFULE V. THE STATE | |
| AMALGAMATED PRESS V. ALLEN | |
| AMASIKE V. CAC | |
| AMOCO AUSTRALIA PTY LTD V. ROCCA BROS MOTOR ENGINEERING CO PTY LTD | |
| AMOS ORIJA & ORS. V. THE CHAIRMAN NATIONAL POPULATION COMMISSION & ORS | ACTION – CONSOLIDATION OF ACTIONS: The purpose of consolidation of actions; and whether different judgments ought to be delivered in respect of such consolidated suits |
| ANABARONYE V. NWAKAIHE |
ACTION:- Parties to an action – Necessary party – Who is. ACTION:- Representative action – Authority of party suing in a representative capacity – Objection thereto – Procedure therefor – Duty on defendant so objecting. ACTION:- Representative action – Failure to obtain leave therefor – Effect – Whether fatal. |
| ANAEZE V. ANYASO | ACTION:- Counter-claim – Absence of reply thereto – Effect |
| ANATOGU V. IWEKA II |
ACTION:- Review – Action for review of judgment in action already concluded – When maintainable – Relevant considerations. ACTION:- Review – Review of a case/judgment on appeal – Review of a case/ judgment by instituting a new case – Distinction between – Procedure governing both – Whether the same. ACTION:- Review of case or judgment – Action instituted at trial court thereof – Question of fresh evidence – Relevance of thereto. |
| ANUEYIAGU V. DEPUTY SHERIFF KANO | ACTION:- Bond – Given in express amount for release of goods from attachment pending interpleader – How it can be enforced.
ACTION:- Petitions of Right Act- Scope of. |
| ANYADUBA V. NIGERIAN RENOWNED TRADING COMPANY LTD.(3) | ACTION:- Parties to an action – Non-joinder or mis-joinder of – Effect – Whether fatal to the proceedings. |
| ANYAH V. IYAYI | ACTION:- Competence of action – Defendant seeking to challenge – Ways by which he may do so. |
| ANYANWU V. THE STATE | ACTION:- Declaratory Action – Whether the burden is on the claimant to lead credible evidence to show that he is entitled to the declaration sought – Need to succeed on the strength of his own case, and not on the weakness of the defence, even where there is an admission by the defendant – Whether declaratory judgments are not awarded on admissions but on the evidence of the claimant – Whether courts do not grant declaratory reliefs either in default of defence or admissions, without hearing evidence and being satisfied by such evidence – Position on declaratory reliefs as an exception to the rule that facts admitted need no proof |
| APAMPA V. THE STATE | ACTION:- No case submission in criminal proceedings – Basis – Prosecution had not made a prima facie due to failure to prove a constitutive element of crime charged – Effect |
| APOSTLE PETER EKWEOZOR & ORS v. THE REGISTERED TRUSTEES OF SAVIOURS APOSTOLIC CHURCH OF NIGERIA |
ACTION – JURISDICTION:- Ancillary issue – Where a party’s claim falls within the jurisdiction of two separate courts – Whether it is the court that has the jurisdiction to adjudicate on the principal claim that should be approached ACTION:- Averments – Denial of – Onus of proof – On whom lies |
| ARCHBISHOP OLUBUNMI OKOGIE & ORS. V. MRS MARGARET EPOYUN | ACTION:- PLEADINGS: Need for issues to be raised from pleadings |
| ARCHITECTS REGISTRATION COUNCIL OF NIGERIA V. PROFESSOR FASSASSI NO.1 | |
| ARE V. ADISA AND ANOTHER | ACTION -CIVIL ACTION – – Onus of proof in proceedings |
| AREFUNWON V. BARBER | ACTION – LIMITATION OF ACTION:- Limitation of Action to recover land – Proof of adverse possession – Whether onus on the person in whose favour the period of limitation is alleged to have ran. |
| AREMO II V. ADEKANYE AND ORS. – CA | |
| AREMO II V. ADEKANYE AND ORS. – SC | ACTION:- Cause of action – Law applicable thereto. |
| AREWA PAPER CONVERTERS LTD V. N.D.I.C. (NIG. UNIVERSAL BANK LTD.) | ACTION:- Cause of action – Law applicable thereto – Law applicable to determining issue of jurisdiction – Distinction between. |
| ARIBISALA V. OGUNYEMI |
ACTION:- Commencement of action – Chieftaincy matter – Action in respect of – What plaintiff must show – Need to show that prescribed remedies or procedure exhausted or followed before commencement of action. ACTION-Commencement of action – Where statute prescribes steps to remedy a situation – Need to exhaust the steps or remedies before resort to court. |
| ARINZE V. ODITA | |
| ARIZE V. NIGERIAN NATIONAL PETROLEUM CORPORATION |
ACTION – SERVICE OF COURT PROCESSES:- When service is deemed irregular – Relevant considerations ACTION – SERVICE OF COURT PROCESSES:- Service on statutory/corporate organisation with principal Office/Headquarters distinct from its branches – Proper place of service of court processes – Where statute specially provides for rules regarding same – Where not followed – Effect |
| ARO V. KADIRI | ACTION:- Action in Customary Court – High Court on appeal setting aside judgment in plaintiffs favour in Customary Court dismissal substituted – Whether proper order is dismissal or non- suit – Plaintiff litigating same matter without success on two previous occasions – Whether enough to preclude order of retrial. |
| ARO V. OBALORO | |
| AROMOLARAN V. OLADELE | ACTION:- Claim before Air court – What determines. |
| AROWOLO V. ADIMULA | Representative action ‑ Defending an action in a representative capacity ‑ Order 11 Rules 7(1) and 8 of High Court (Uniform Civil Procedure) Rules of Kwara State 1988 ‑ When can a defendant he properly sued in a representative capacity |
| AROWOLO V. AKAPO | |
| ASABORO V. ARUWAJI | |
| ASANI SOGUNRO & ORS V. AREMU YEKU & ANOR | ACTION:- PLEADINGS: The effect of pleadings |
| ASHAYE V. AKERELE | ACTION – PARTIES: Commencement of suit – Parties to an action over a disputed contract – Whether a nonprofit can be a party to court proceeding relating to a contract in which none of its trustees was party |
| ASHUBIOJO V. AFRICAN CONTINENTAL BANK | ACTION – CIVIL ACTION. |
| ASIYANBI AND OTHERS. V. ADENIJI | ACTION – CIVIL ACTION – Judgment and formal order – Amendment or correction of records after formal order – Inherent Jurisdiction, ‘slip rule’ – Principles. |
| ASOLO & ORS V. TIRIMISIYU ASOLO & ORS | ACTION – PROPER PARTIES: Effect on any proceedings where proper parties where not brought before the court |
| ATAGUBA AND COMPANY V. GURA NIGERIA LIMITED | ACTION:- Parties to an action – Person who can sue and be sued – Categories of. |
| ATANDA V. AKUNYUN | ACTION:- Parties – Representative Actions – Import, extent – Unilateral withdrawal by party appealing in representative capacity – Effect – Represented persons – Right to continue case. |
| ATANSUYI V. GBADAMOSI | |
| ATAYI FARMS LTD V. NIGERIA AGRICULTURAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD & ANOR | ACTION – CONSOLIDATION OF ACTION: The purpose of consolidation of actions |
| ATI V. EKPENYONG | |
| ATTAH V. NNACHO | ACTION:- Civil Action – – Consolidation of suits – pleadings complete in one, not in the other – Trial without objection – Area of land in dispute – Pleadings and plan – Injunction against community, with exception of certain persons. |
| ATTORNEY GENERAL & ANOTHER V. ANTIGUA TIMES LTD | |
| ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ANAMBRA STATE V. NWOSU EBOH | ACTION:- Cause of action ‑ Meaning of
ACTION:- Institution of action ‑ Existence o/ Locus Standi ‑ How determined – Whether evidence necessary |
| ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO AND ANOTHER V. MCLEOD | |
| ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF THE FEDERATION V. ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF ABIA STATE | ACTION:- Boundary dispute – Whether Federation of Nigeria can engage States therein.
ACTION:- Cause of action – Meaning of – Reasonable cause of action – What constitutes. ACTION:- Commencement of actions – Where irregular procedure used therefor – When court will waive same. ACTION:- Determination of boundary of a State – Action therefor – Whether Supreme Court has jurisdiction to determine same. |
| ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF THE FEDERATION V. ATIKU ABUBAKAR | ACTION:- Cause of action – Elements of- Need to exist is suit. |
| ATTORNEY-GENERAL, BAYELSA STATE V. ATTORNEY-GENERAL, RIVERS STATE | ACTION:- Cause of action – What amounts to – Whether statute barred – How determined. |
| AUGUSTINE MAIKYO V. W.E. ITODO, LOCAL GOVERNMENT SERVICE COMMISSION, BENUE STATE | ACTION |
| AUGUSTINE NDULUE V. NWANKWO IBEZIM & ANOR | ACTION:- Representative action: Action instituted in a representative capacity against persons or a community in a representative capacity – Proper way of instituting same – Whether that action is not only by or against the named parties, it is also against and by those the named parties represent – Effect of death of named parties – Whether the action still subsists on behalf of or against those they represent but who have not been stated nomine – Whether such an action cannot be prosecuted or defended until a living person has been substituted for the named dead party |
| AUGUSTUSA NDUKAUBA V. CHIEF SILAS M. KOLOMO | ACTION:- Appearance in court – Physical presence of litigant in court – Whether compulsory. |
| AUSTIN O. EREBOR V.MAJOR AND COMPANY (NIG.) LTD AND CHIEF FRANCIS Y. IMHAGWE | ACTION – Section 299 of the Companies and Allied Matters Act, 1990 – minority shareholder action |
| AUTEN V. RAYNER AND OTHERS | |
| AVINASH CHANDER MALHOTRA V. BANK OF SINGAPORE LIMITED (FORMERLY ING ASIA PRIVATE BANK LIMITED) | ACTION:- ORIGINATING SUMMONS- when to commence an action by way of Originating Summons |
| AWE V. ALABI | ACTION:- Civil Action Application for extension of time to file appeal- Conditions. |
| AWOJOBI V. OLAJIDE | |
| AWOLAJA V. SHEHU | |
| AWOYO AND OTHERS . V. OPERE AND OTHERS . AND CHAIRMAN, L.E.D.B | ACTION:- Civil Actions – Claim for compensation – Property acquired by Lagos Executive Development Board – Claims based on crown grant dated 4th June 1912. |
| AYANKOYA V. OLUKOYA |
ACTION:- Parties to an action -Joinder of parties – Applicable rule in Oyo State – Order 8 rule l Oyo State High Court Rules -Whether in pari materia with Order 16 rule 1, English Rules –Whether English authorities based on Order 16 rule I useful in interpreting Order 8 rule 1. ACTION:- Parties to. an action – Joinder of parties and causes of action – When permissible – Conditions precedent thereto. ACTION- Parties to an action -Misjoinder or non-joinder of parties to an action – Waiver of objection thereto – What could amount to. ACTION:- Parties to an action – Misjoinder or non joinder of parties – Party alleging – Duty on him to act timeously – Where he fails to do so – Effect. ACTION:- Parties to an action – Misjoinder or non joinder of parties to an action – Whether fatal. |
JUDGMENTS OF NIGERIAN COURTS |
|
| By Substantive Areas | |
Related Content
LAGOS STATE SCHOOLS OF NURSING (GOVERNMENT COUNCIL) LAW
DOWNLOAD OF A COPY OF THIS LAW IS AVAILABLE [N2000
LAGOS STATE COLLEGE OF EDUCATION LAW
DOWNLOAD OF A COPY OF THIS LAW IS AVAILABLE [N2000