PROCEDURAL STEPS ON ASSESSMENT AND VERIFICATION IN FILING COURT PROCESSES IN THE FCT
HIGH COURT OF THE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY, ABUJA. PROCEDURAL STEPS
FIND JUDGMENTS BY:
CASES/JUDGMENTS OF NIGERIAN COURTS ON EVIDENCE (6)
[This Index in full and Judgment(s)/listed and published here can be 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 |
| HAIDO V. USMAN | EVIDENCE:– Admission – admission of appellant – Whether conclusive in the circumstances of this case. |
| HALIFAX PLC AND OTHERS V. HALIFAX REPOSSESSIONS LTD AND OTHERS | EVIDENCE:- Bail application – Burden of proving entitlement to bail – On whom lies. |
| HAMADU HUNARE V. YAYA NANA | EVIDENCE:- Proof – Claim for property under Islamic law – Claimant giving contradictory evidence -Defence giving reliable evidence – Duty on court to believe evidence of the defence. |
| HAMMED A. TORIOLA AND ANOR. V. MRS. OLUSHOLA WILLIAMS | EVIDENCE:– Estoppels per rem judicatam – Meaning – Justification – Whether the mere filing of one suit without its prosecution to judgment does not create an estoppel per rem judicatam against the filing and prosecution of other claims on the same subject-matter. |
| HANSEATIC INTERNATIONAL LTD V. EDRAH | EVIDENCE:– Affidavit’s – conflict therein – how resolved. EVIDENCE:– Pleadings – bindings effect of on plaintiff. |
| HASSAN AND ORS V. ALHAJI SUFIANU AMINU AND ORS | EVIDENCE – Section 34 of the Evidence Act – Reward of proceedings and judgment in a previous case – Propriety of trial court admitting same without ensuring compliance with section 34. EVIDENCE – Unpleaded document – whether can be tendered in evidence. |
| HASSAN V. MAIDUGURI MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE | EVIDENCE:- Admissibility ‑ Legally inadmissible EVIDENCE:- (Categories of Attitude of court to each category EVIDENCE:- Admissibility ‑ Legally inadmissible EVIDENCE:- Consent of parties Effect EVIDENCE:- Admissibility ‑ Legally inadmissible evidence Duty on court in respect thereof |
| HASSAN V. JAURO | EVIDENCE – Burden of proving particular facts – on whom lies. EVIDENCE – Documentary evidence:- respondent giving oral evidence of a land sale transaction when he failed to produce in evidence the power of attorney evidencing the sale – propriety of. |
| HASSAN YINUSA AND ANOR. V. THE STATE | EVIDENCE LAW:- Evidence of co-accused – Absence of Corroboration – Whether it is safe to convict on it – Section 177(2) of the Evidence Law – Duty of court thereto – Where incriminating evidence of a co-accused is not corroborated – How properly treated – Duty of appeal court in dealing with conviction and sentence based on uncorroborated and incriminating evidence of a co-accused EVIDENCE:- Confession – Characteristics of a confessional statement – Section 27 of Evidence Act. |
| HAWAY V. MEDICOWA NIGERIA LTD. | EVIDENCE:– Burden and standard of proof in a claim for special damages – how discharged. |
| HERB V. DEVIMCO INTERNATIONAL B.V. | EVIDENCE – Presumption of regularity – whether applicable to orders made by the Deputy Registrar for service of court processes outside jurisdiction which orders she had no powers to make. |
| HILARY FARMS LTD V. MV MAHTRA | EVIDENCE:- Unchallenged or uncontroverted fact or facts – Whether need no further proof especially if the said fact or facts pleaded, are given in evidence |
| HIS HIGHNESS V. A. OTITOJU | EVIDENCE:- Documentary evidence – Document signed in places and thumb-printed in places – Whether ipso fact null and void EVIDENCE:- Presumptions – Presumption of illiteracy – Whether court can make EVIDENCE:- Proof – Burden of proof of illiteracy – On whom it lies – |
| HIS ROYAL MAJESTY OBA (DR.) GABRIEL ADEKUNLE CFR V. CHIEF ADEFIOYE ADEDEJI | EVIDENCE:- AFFIDAVIT EVIDENCE: Whether a respondent is under any obligation to file a counter affidavit to the deposition of facts by his opponent |
| HOLDENT INTERNATIONAL LIMITED V. PETERSVILIE NIGERIA LIMITED | EVIDENCE:- EVALUATION OF EVIDENCE:- Guidelines a trial court must observe in the course of evaluation of evidence towards its judgment – Whether it is only after satisfying itself that the guidelines have been complied with that a trial court should then apply the law to the situation presented in the case – How to properly apply the law EVIDENCE – ATTRIBUTES OF GOOD JUDGMENT:- Attributes of a good and valid judgment – What it must comprise |
| HON. ANTHONY OGUEJIOFOR & ORS V. HYACINTH EJIDIKE & ORS | EVIDENCE:- Burden of proof in consolidated suits – When doctrine of ‘standing by’ will apply – Basis of the principle |
| HON. BABANGIDA S. M. NGUROJE & ANOR V. HON. IBRAHIM TUKUR EL-SUDI & ORS | EVIDENCE:- Burden of proof – On whom lies – Whether oral depositions can challenge or override the contents of a document |
| HON. BASSEY ETIM & ANOR. V. HON. EMMANUEL BASSEY OBOT & ORS. | COURT – ABUSE OF COURT PROCESSES: What constitutes abuse of court processes |
| HON. CHRISTIAN O. AGA & ORS. V. JEREMY C. ONAH & ORS | EVIDENCE – PRESUMPTION OF LAW: Presumption as to the judgment or ruling of a court being correct until it is disproved by a higher court – On whom lies the burden of showing the contrary |
| HON. JUSTICE GARBA ABDULLAHI V. THE GOVERNOR OF KANO STATE & ORS | EVIDENCE:- AFFIDAVIT: Instance when the issue of competency of any application to certain paragraphs in an affidavit may go to the issue of jurisdiction or mere irregularity |
| HON. MKPANAM OBO-BASSEY EKPO & ANOR V. NGIM OKPOR KANU & ORS. | EVIDENCE:- Whether parties are bound by their pleadings |
| HONIKA SAWMILL (NIG.) LTD, V. HOFF | EVIDENCE:- Pleadings – Averments in pleadings – Where not traversed – Effect – Whether need further proof- Section 74 Evidence Act 1958 and Order 13 rule 9 Bendel State High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules 1976. EVIDENCE:- Proof- Burden of proof in civil cases – Essence of – On whom it lies – Whether static – Section 135, Evidence Act. EVIDENCE:- Proof – Onus of proof – What it is – Whether exists in vacuo. |
| HONORABLE COMMISSIONER FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT, RURAL DEVELOPMENT | EVIDENCE:- Affidavit evidence -Conflicts therein – How resolved – Duty on court in respect thereof. |
| HOPE UZODINMA V. SENATOR OSITA B. IZUNASO & ORS | EVIDENCE:- CONFLICTING EVIDENCE: Whether it is in every case of conflict in evidence that oral evidence is resorted to |
| HOPE DEMOCRATIC PARTY (HDP) V. MR PETER OBI & ORS. | |
| HUSSAINI V. OGBUOKIRI | EVIDENCE – Evidential burden – shifting of same in civil cases. |
| I.B.W.A. LTD V. UNAKALAMBA | EVIDENCE:- Proof – Onus of proof in civil cases – On whom lies – Whether shifts. EVIDENCE:- Witnesses – Witness testifying in local language – Effect. |
| I.B.W.A. V. IMANO | EVIDENCE:– Admissibility of a copy of a banker’s book |
| I.T. ADENUGA V. ILESANMI PRESS AND SONS (NIG.) LTD. | EVIDENCE:- Admissibility – Document not pleaded – Whether admissible EVIDENCE-Admissibility-Wrongful admission of evidence-Whether sufficient to upset trial court’s judgment EVIDENCE:- Proof – Burden of proof in civil cases – Nature of – How determined therein. |
| IBEANU V. OGBEIDE | EVIDENCE:- Unchallenged EVIDENCE:- how treated |
| IBEH V. STATE | EVIDENCE:- Evidence of prosecution – Duty on court in evaluation of – Where there is doubt – Duty on court to resolve in favour of accused EVIDENCE:- Evidence of prosecution – Duty on court to evaluate as a whole –Whether court can pick and choose which prosecution witnesses to believe and which to reject -Whether court can accredit one set of witnesses and discredit the other. |
| IBERO V. UME-OHANA | EVIDENCE:- Proof – Whether onus of proof in civil cases shifts |
| IBEZIAKO V. NWAGBOGU AND ANOTHER | EVIDENCE:- Evidence of a witness in a judgment set aside on appeal – Extent to which it could be used in another trial |
| IBRAHIM DEMS V. C. O. P. | EVIDENCE:- Accomplice – Person taking bribe from accused and applying it for same illegal purpose for which it was given -Whether an accomplice. |
| IBRAHIM KANO V. GBADAMOSI OYELAKIN | EVIDENCE:- Admissions – Admission in pleading – Whether proof still necessary or unnecessary -Guiding principles. EVIDENCE:- Proof – Duty on plaintiff to prove his ease – Whether until where plaintiff can rely on weakness in defendant’s ease to do so. EVIDENCE:- Proof- Fiat admitted -Where necessary to prove -Owosho V. Dada (1984) 7 S.C. 149) revisited and explained. |
| IBRAHIM V. OSIM | EVIDENCE:- Application to for the striking out of a statement of claim – Whether evidence is adduceable in. |
| IBUM OLUMBA V. THE REG. TRUSTEE, BROTHERHOOD OF THE CROSS & STAR | EVIDENCE:- BURDEN OF PROOF: Judgments and orders of Courts – Whether proved by oral deposition in affidavits – Section 83(1) of the Act, 2011 – Section 132 of the Evidence Act – Whether burden of proof in a suit or proceeding lies on that person who would fail if no evidence at all were given on either side – Orders of Courts of law – Whether usually proved by certified true copies of the Court’s judgments or enrolled orders duly certified by the Registrar of that Court |
| ICAN AND ORS. V. ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF THE FEDERATION | EVIDENCE:– Further affidavit – Whether use of further affidavit when arguments had commenced in a motion is permissible – Applicable principles. |
| IDAKULA V. RICHARDS | EVIDENCE:- Admission – Admitted facts- Whether need to be proved. EVIDENCE:- Pleadings – Pre-judgment interest – Duty on plaintiff to plead and prove. |
| IDENYI V. THE QUEEN | EVIDENCE:- Accomplices – Corroboration – Written statements of accused – Whether they can serve as corroboration – Duty of court thereto |
| IDIEMO V. INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE | EVIDENCE:- Evidence of an accomplice – Corroboration – What amounts to. EVIDENCE:- Evidence of an accomplice – Need for corroboration -What amounts to. |
| IDIRISU V. THE STATE | EVIDENCE:- Criminal trial – Expert evidence – Admissibility of medical report which contents were at variance with the oral evidence given by prosecution Witness – Where trial judge refused defendant’s application for medical officer to testify – Attitude of appellate court to denial of an accused opportunity to challenge any evidence given against him – Other evidence in support of charge – Whether no miscarriage of justice was occasioned |
| IDOWU SALAMI V. THE STATE | EVIDENCE:- Doctrine of recent possession – Stolen property – Section 148(a) Evidence Act 1945 -Application – Effect. |
| IDRIS GARBA V. BABANGIDA LAWAL | EVIDENCE:- BURDEN OF PROOF:- Civil cases – Rule that the onus of proving an allegation is on the plaintiff and the onus does not shift until he has proved his claim on the preponderance of evidence and balance of probabilities – When burden is deemed to have shifted to defendant and continues to shift EVIDENCE:- BURDEN OF PROOF:- Section 139 of the Evidence Act, Cap 112 Laws of the Federation 1990 and civil case – In considering the amount of evidence necessary to shift the burden of proof – Whether regard shall be had by the Court to the opportunity of knowledge with respect to the fact to be proved which may be possessed by the parties respectively |
| IDRIS OLOYEDE ASANIKE V. MRS. OJUOLAPE AKINLEYE & ANOR | COURT – EVALUATION OF EVIDENCE:- DUTY OF COURT:- When a trial court fails in its duty to properly consider the evidence before it – Where the failure had led to the drawing of wrongful conclusions from the evidence accepted by the court – Whether appellate court is perfectly justified in re-evaluating and reconsidering the whole evidence in order to arrive at a just decision |
| IDUNDUN V. OKUMAGBA | EVIDENCE:– Presumption of ownership of land under section 45 of Evidence Act – conditions precedent to the application of same. EVIDENCE:– Wrongful admission of evidence under section 226(1) of Evidence Act – effect of. |
| IFEANYI NWAFOR V. THE STATE | EVIDENCE:- INCONSISTENCY RULE:- Situations in which the inconsistency rule apply – Witness – Where a witness gives an extra judicial statement different from his evidence on oath – Where a witness gives evidence in chief which is different from the one he gives during cross examination – Whether a maker of two apparently inconsistent statements must be allowed to explain the apparent contradiction – Duty of judge thereto – Whether the judge has no discretion to pick and choose which evidence is correct – How treated |
| IGBINEWEKA OWIE V. THE STATE | EVIDENCE:- Statement of accused to Police – Admissibility – Failure to hold trial within trial – Objection that Statement not read over to accused by recording officer – Statement property admitted since voluntariness not in issue only evidential value. |
| IGBINOKPOGIE V. OGEDEGBE | EVIDENCE:- Proof – Evidence led on fact not pleaded – How treated. |
| EVIDENCE:- Confession obtained by means of police entrapment – Admissibility – Weight. EVIDENCE:- Competent witness – Whether includes agents provocateurs – Whether there is no doctrine of entrapment in Nigerian law | |
| IGBOBI V. THE QUEEN | EVIDENCE:- Witnesses – Accomplice’s evidence – Absence of corroboration – Effect. |
| IGBOEKWEZE V. QUEEN | EVIDENCE:- Attitude of court to the evidence of an accused against co-accused |
| IGBOZOR V. PRINCE NYONG INYANG EFFIONG & ORS | EVIDENCE AND ACTION- ADDRESS OF COUNSEL: Whether the address of counsel can replace evidence |
| IGE V. AKOJU | EVIDENCE:- Evidence at variance with pleadings – How treated. EVIDENCE:- Evidence led on fact not pleaded – How treated. EVIDENCE:- Proof’- Boundary of land in dispute – Conflicting evidence of party on same – Probative value of EVIDENCE:- Witnesses – Findings of trial court on demeanour of witness – Attitude of appellate court thereto. |
| IGWE V. THE QUEEN | EVIDENCE:- Confessional statement – Complete denial by accused of authorship – Question of fact for Judge – Resolvable at conclusion of case – Not treated as when voluntariness is challenged. EVIDENCE:- Confessional statement – Confirmation before another officer – Statement made in vernacular and translated into English – Desirable if vernacular version is confirmed. EVIDENCE:- Criminal trial – Confessional statement – Desirability of independent EVIDENCE:- Evidence of accomplices enough. |
| IGWE V. UKWEJE | EVIDENCE:- Onus of proving exclusive ownership of land – Discharging the burden of proof. |
| IGWEDE V. THE QUEEN | EVIDENCE:- Corroboration – Nature of Corroboration required in criminal cases. |
| IGWEGO AND OTHERS V. EZEUGO AND OTHERS | EVIDENCE:- Section 46 Evidence Act – Proper application of. |
| IHABHARE V. QUEEN | EVIDENCE:- Identification – Discrepancies in evidence of witness -Weight to be attached. |
| IHEANACHO V. CHIGERE | EVIDENCE:- Evidence led by a party -When it can be relied on by the other party EVIDENCE:- Burden of proof in civil cases – Proof of custom which is not judicially noticed – onus of |
| IKE V. ODUMA | EVIDENCE:- Findings of fact on EVIDENCE:- Attitude of appellate court. |
| IKEAGWU V. NWAMKPA | EVIDENCE:- Res judicata – Two conflicting judgments – Which constitutes res judicata. |
| IKEBUAKU V. THE QUEEN | EVIDENCE:- Evidence of witness – When corroboration of evidence required. |
| IKECHUKWU SUNDAY V. THE STATE | EVIDENCE:- CALLING OF WITNESSES: Where two or more persons are witnesses to an event – Whether the law imposes a duty on the prosecution to call all the persons as witnesses – Whether what the law requires and the burden it imposed on the number of witnesses to be called is entirely that of the prosecution EVIDENCE:- ALIBI: Plea of alibi by an accused person – Meaning – When prosecution can lead strong and positive evidence which fixes the accused person at the scene of crime and which evidence the court accepts the alibi naturally collapses – legal effect thereof |
| IKEMSON V. THE STATE | EVIDENCE:- Confessional statement – Voluntariness – refraction – Contradictions in Prosecution EVIDENCE:- How dealt with – Material evidence -How determined. |
| IKENYE V. OFUNE | EVIDENCE:- Inspection notes in previous proceedings – Admitted in subsequent proceedings without proper foundation – Non-Compliance with conditions prescribed in section 34(1) Evidence Act – Inspection notes relied on by High Court and Court of Appeal – Effect of. |
| IKEOGU V. REGINA | EVIDENCE:- Corroboration of unsworn evidence of child – What amounts to. EVIDENCE:- Unsworn evidence of a child – Whether corroboration is required – Section 182(3) of the Evidence Act. |
| IKO V. STATE | EVIDENCE:- Admission – Admission by accused of an offence – Whether constitutes corroboration EVIDENCE:- Corroboration – Admission by accused person of an offence – Whether constitutes corroboration EVIDENCE:- Corroboration – Court warning therefor – How given EVIDENCE:- Corroboration – Matters wrongly suggested by court to be corroboration – Effect on conviction |
| IKOKU V. OLI | EVIDENCE:- Facts in issue – Distinguished from facts which are merely collateral. EVIDENCE:- Malicious prosecution – Pleadings averring that charge was false but not stating that it was false to the knowledge or belief of defendant – Whether crime is directly in issue to require proof beyond reasonable doubt – Section 137 Evidence Act. |
| IKONO LOCAL GOVERNMENT V. DE BEACON FINANCE & SECURITIES LTD. | EVIDENCE:– Affidavit evidence – uncontradicted averment in affidavit – effect of. EVIDENCE:– Uncontradicted evidence – whether trial court can act on same. |
| IKPANG V. EDOHO | EVIDENCE:- Estoppel per rem judicatem – When availing – Traditional evidence – How evaluated |
| IKPASA V. BENDEL STATE | EVIDENCE:- Confessional Statement – Admissibility – Distinction between retracted confession and one challenged as made involuntarily – Trial within trial – Whether inapplicable for retracted confession |
| IKYEREVE IORDYE V. TOR IHYAMBE | EVIDENCE – Proof – Declaration of title to land – Burden of proof of Identity of land claimed – On whom it lies – How discharged. |
| ILEDARE V. AJAGBONNA | EVIDENCE:- Proof of title to land – Possession -When can be relied upon to defeat claim – Section 146, Evidence Act considered. |
| ILIYASU SUBERU V. THE STATE | EVIDENCE:- INADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE: When evidence is ruled inadmissible – Whether the court cannot make use of it at any stage even if no objection has been raised against it at the trial |
| ILIYASU UMAR V. BAYERO UNIVERSITY, KANO | EVIDENCE:- Tendering of documents – Photograph – Inconclusiveness of – Visit to locus in quo – Proper time to exercise discretion – Evidential value of. |
| IMO V. THE STATE | EVIDENCE:- Proof of crime – Best Evidence. EVIDENCE:- Proof of crime – Contradictions in evidence of prosecution’s witnesses – Nature of contradiction fatal to prosecutions case. EVIDENCE:- Proof of crime – Witnesses – Evidence of one witness – Whether sufficient to ground conviction. |
| IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION BY CHIEF SALAMI ADESINA | EVIDENCE:- Affidavits – Unchallenged depositions therein – How treated. |
| INAJO AND FOUR OTHERS V. THE STATE | EVIDENCE:- Medical evidence- Depositions – Admissibility under Criminal Procedure Code, s.249(J)(a) – Whether admissibility depends on proof of medical qualifications of deponent EVIDENCE:- Contradictions or inconsistency of evidence – What constitutes – Need for inconsistency to be material – Relevant considerations |
| INCORPORATED TRUSTEES OF NIGERIA ASSOCIATION OF GENERAL PRACTICE PHARMACISTS EMPLOYERS V. PHARMACISTS COUNCIL OF NIGERIA | EVIDENCE:- AFFIDAVIT: Test to determine whether a matter is extraneous in an affidavit |
| INSURANCE BROKERS OF NIGERIA V. ATLANTIC TEXTILES MANUFACTURING COMPANY LIMITED | EVIDENCE:- Admissions – Admission in civil cases – How treated. EVIDENCE:- Evaluation of evidence by trial court – Attitude of appellate court’ thereto. EVIDENCE:- Proof – Onus of proof in civil cases – Principles governing – Corresponding duty on plaintiff and defendant – Duty on plaintiff to succeed on the strength of his own case – When may succeed on the weakness of the defendant’s case. |
| INTERNATIONAL OFFSHORE CONSTRUCTION LTD V. SHORELINE LIFTBOATS NIGERIA LTD | EVIDENCE:- Standard of proof- Unchallenged evidence – Where evidence of plaintiff is unchallenged – Standard of proof required. |
| INWEREOGU V. OGBU | EVIDENCE:- Proof of – Declaration of title to land – Standard required. |
| INYANG ETIM AKPAN (Alias MBOM ETIM AKPAN) V. THE STATE. | EVIDENCE -Admissibility – Inadmissible evidence -Wrongful reception of-How such evidence treated. EVIDENCE:- Documentary evidence – Documents admitted during trial – How treated – Need to give distinctive identification marks to each – Where not done – Effect EVIDENCE:- Medical evdence- Use of to establish cause of death – Whether absolutely necessary in every case. |
| IORYEM IORTIM AND AONDOLUMUN IORTIM V. STATE | EVIDENCE-Proof of crime- Onus on prosecution- Whether shifts- How discharged. |
| IPINLAIYE II V. OLUKOTUN | EVIDENCE:- Admissibility – Documentary evidence – Objection thereto – When to raise. EVIDENCE:- Admissibility of evidence- Failure to object thereto at the trial – Whether bars subsequent objection thereto on appeal – Relevant considerations EVIDENCE:- Admissibility – Previous written inconsistent statement of a witness – Where sought to contradict or discredit the witness – How, tendered – Sections 199, 209 and 210 of the Evidence Act considered. |
| IRIS WINIFRED HORN V. ROBERT RICKARD | EVIDENCE:- Affidavit evidence – Affidavit by counsel in the case – Whether subject to objection-whether in breach of client’s privilege of secrecy – Whether involving counsel personally in the dispute. extraneous matter – Legal argument or conclusion – Averment of existence of state of affairs on which order sought would be grounded – Evidence Ordinance, 1948 Laws of Nigeria Cap. 63, s. 86. |
| IROMACHI V. QUEEN | EVIDENCE:- Murder – Evidence that accused had opportunity without more of committing crime – Whether sufficient to ground conviction |
| IRONU DIKE (ALIAS IGBO ETIM) AND ORS V. CHIEF N. O. NWANKWO | EVIDENCE:- Proof – Onus of proof on plaintiff in claim for declaration of title How discharged. EVIDENCE:- Proof of boundary in land matters – Survey plan – Whether necessary when identity of land in dispute is certain. |
| ISAAC OGUALAJI V. ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF RIVERS STATE | EVIDENCE – Proof – Unchallenged EVIDENCE:- How treated. EVIDENCE:- Wrongful rejection of evidence – Whether that alone will result in reversing judgment reached thereby – Party complaining thereof’-What he must show to succeed. |
| ISERU V. CATHOLIC BISHOP WARRI DIOCESS | EVIDENCE:- Facts not pleaded – Evidence thereon – How treated. |
| ISHAYA BAMAIYI V. THE STATE | EVIDENCE:– Affidavit evidence – Contents of – Legal position thereon. |
| ISHOLA V. SOCIETE GENERALE BANK (NIG.) LIMITED | EVIDENCE:- Presumptions – Overdraft-Customer drawing more than amount in his account – Presumption raised thereby. EVIDENCE:- Proof – Acts of company – Who can testify therefor on behalf of company -Whether necessarily officer involved in such act. EVIDENCE:- Proof – Claim for interest -Onus on party claiming -Need to plead and prove entitlement thereto. |
| ISHOLA V. UNION BANK OF NIGERIA LIMITED | EVIDENCE:- DOCUMENT – Construction of documents – Clear and unambiguous words in a document – How construed. EVIDENCE:- DOCUMENT – Documentary evidence – Document admitted for a purpose – Duty on court to limit use of to that purpose – Where relied on for other purpose – Duty of appellate court thereto EVIDENCE:- Evaluation of evidence – Duty on trial court in respect of – Issues raised suo motu by court regarding same – Need to invite parties to address court on same – Effect of failure thereto |
| ISHOLA-WILLIAMS V. T. A. HAMMOND PROJECTS LTD. | EVIDENCE:- Onus of proof, breach of covenant where lies – Action for forfeiture. |
| ISSAC IGBOASONYI AND ORS. V. NNAMEZIE ONWUBUARIRI AND ORS. | EVIDENCE:- Conditions and principles applicable for the admission fresh evidence on appeal and when will be granted |
| ISSOR V. NWABUDE | EVIDENCE:- Admissibility of – Parties consenting to at lower Court – Later arguing against in appellate Court – Whether permissible. |
| ITA V. DADZIE | EVIDENCE:- Whether the defendant/respondent had, by evidence led during the trial, discharged the burden of proof placed on him by the law – Whether evidence rendered inadmissible by virtue of the pleadings may be rendered admissible by a subsequent order amending the pleadings to incorporate such evidence? |
| ITEBU V. ORUKUMAKPOR | EVIDENCE – DOCUMENT:- Interpretation of – Settlement of parties made by order of Court – Trial judge hearing extrinsic evidence as to intention of parties -Section 131 Evidence Ordinance |
| IVIAN NDIGWE ANAZODO V. ESTHER JOHN AUDU & ORS | EVIDENCE – ALLEGATIONS OF CRIME: How allegations of crime in a civil proceeding must be proved |
| IVIENAGBOR V. BAZUAYE | EVIDENCE:- Proof- “Inference” – “Speculation” – Distinction between. EVIDENCE:- Proof – Unchallenged EVIDENCE:- How treated. |
| IWUNO V. DIELI | EVIDENCE:- Admissibility – Party objecting to admission of a piece of evidence – Whether can subsequently complain of its wrong exclusion. |
| IYAJI V. EYIGEBE | EVIDENCE:- Res judicata |
| IYAKIN V. GBAJUMO | EVIDENCE:- Res judicata – When deemed established – Relevant considerations |
| IYAREGBA V. QUEEN | EVIDENCE:- Post-mortem report – Maker not called as a witness -Admissibility of |
| IYERE V. BENDEL FEED AND FLOUR MILL LTD | EVIDENCE:- Proof-Burden of proof-On whom lies. EVIDENCE:- Proof-Unchallenged and uncontroverted EVIDENCE:- How treated. EVIDENCE -Onus of proof-Negligence – Onus of proof-Whether shifts. |
| IYIOLA OGUNJUMO & ORS V. MURITALA ADEMOLU & ORS | EVIDENCE:- UNCHALLENGED EVIDENCE: Effect of unchallenged evidence |
| IYOWUAWI V. IYOWUAWI | EVIDENCE:- Admissions – Binding Effect. |
| J. A. AJAYI V. A. OLU FISHER | EVIDENCE:- Reception of inadmissible evidence – Applicable Principles. |
| J. E. ELUKPO AND SONS LTD. V. F.H.A. | EVIDENCE:- Documentary EVIDENCE:- Document tendered by expert – Whether fact of tendering by expert conclusive as to weight and probative value thereof. EVIDENCE:- Expert evidence -Where based on hearsay – Whether admissible if unchallenged and uncontradicted. EVIDENCE:- Pleaded facts – Failure to lead evidence thereon – Effect. |
| J. O. ODUNSI V. THE UNITED NIGERIA MORTGAGE INVESTMENT CO. LTD. | EVIDENCE:- Affidavit – Unchallenged affidavit evidence – When can be disbelieved. |
| JACK AND OTHERS. V. HARRY | EVIDENCE:- Estoppel – Estoppel per rem judicatam – If plea can succeed where there is no evidence as to subject of dispute. |
| JACOB BANKOLE & ORS V. AMODU TIJANI DADA | EVIDENCE:- ADMISSION: What is an admission |
| JADESIMI V. FRED EGBE | EVIDENCE:- Doctrine of “without prejudice” – Admissibility of document evidence made without prejudice – Common Law and Statutory foundation – Application framework in Nigeria – Section 25 of the Evidence Act – Whether in applying the doctrine it is the provision of the Evidence Act that must be used as a guide and not common law principle |
| JALINGO V. NYAME | EVIDENCE:- Evaluation of evidence – Duty on trial court in respect thereof EVIDENCE:- Proof ‑ Electoral offences ‑ Falsification of Election result ‑ Burden and standard of proof thereof‑ On whom lies.. EVIDENCE:- Proof‑ Unchallenged or uncontradicted evidence – How treated. |
| JALOGHO V. THE QUEEN | EVIDENCE:- Evidence of child – Corroboration desirable. EVIDENCE:- Sworn evidence of child aged 10- Need for Court to first satisfy itself that child understands nature of oath. |
| JAMES ONANEFE IBORI & ANOR V. FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA ORS | EVIDENCE:- AFFIDAVIT EVIDENCE: Whether the court is duty bound to evaluate the contents of a lone deposition in an affidavit as to ascertain the veracity or authenticity of the facts alleged therein |
| JARAWU ADELEKE V. LIADI AJADI ASERIFA | EVIDENCE – FRESH EVIDENCE:- Where the issue of the proposed evidence was not relevant to and not covered by any of the grounds of appeal filed before the Court –Duty of court thereto to refuse to consider it EVIDENCE – FRESH EVIDENCE:- Rule against admission of fresh evidence on appeal – Justification – Duty of party proposing fresh evidence to only succeed by showing special circumstances, why the new evidence sought to be admitted ought to be received – Sub-rule (5) of Order 1 rule 20 of the Court of Appeal Rules – Whether the Appellate Court can exercise its discretion only if evidence sought to he admitted satisfy the conditions laid down in order 1 r. 20(3) |
| JARIN ADEGBITE V. OGUNFAOLU | EVIDENCE:- When the question is whether any person is owner of anything of which he is shown to be in possession – Rule that the burden of proving that he is not the owner, is on the person who affirms that he is not the owner – Section 145 of the Evidence Act – Whether merely creates a rebuttable presumption of ownership – Whether does not operate against a person who proves a good title |
| JATAU V. DUNG | EVIDENCE:- Judicial notice of customary law |
| JATAU V. MAILAFIYA | ISLAMIC LAW AND PROCEDURE- EVIDENCE:- Witness – Who is a competent witness under Islamic law – Whether a party is a competent witness. |
| JEREMIAH EGBOMA V. THE STATE | EVIDENCE:- ADMISSIBILITY: Previous judicial proceedings – Whether can be used or admitted in subsequent proceedings to prove the truth of the fact which it states, irrespective of the outcome of the proceedings or how it was concluded – S. 46(1) Evidence Act 2011 – Whether there is nothing in S. 46 (1) of the Evidence Act precluding the admissibility of such previous judicial proceedings in subsequent judicial proceedings because it was struck out, dismissed or terminated in some other way EVIDENCE:- BURDEN OF PROOF – GENERAL – PLEA OF ALIBI: Primary and general onus of proving the guilt of an accused person in criminal proceedings – burden of proof with respect to the plea of alibi by accused person– on whom lies – duty of accused person – When the evidential burden on the prosecution arises with respect to plea of alibi by the accused person – Duty of accused person to ensure that his extra judicial statement is tendered in evidence – Whether it is the accused that has the evidential burden of producing evidence in support of his plea of alibi |
| JERRY O. IMOTO V. H.F.P. ENGINEERING NIG. LIMITED | EVIDENCE – Uncontroverted evidence – Whether court must accept same in all cases |
| JUDGMENTS OF NIGERIAN COURTS | |
| By Substantive Areas | By Litigation/Procedure Areas |
JUDGMENTS BY AREAS OF PRACTICE
JUDGMENTS BY PRACTICE/PROCEDURE ISSUES
HIGH COURT OF THE FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY, ABUJA. PROCEDURAL STEPS
FIND LAW FIRMS BY CATEGORIES By Areas of Practice By
FIND LAW FIRMS BY CATEGORIES By Areas of Practice By