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 (8)
[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 |
| MANAGEMENT ENTERPRISES LTD AND ORS V. JOHNATHAN OTUSANYA | EVIDENCE:- Possession of insurance cover is a question of fact to be proved by evidence res ipsa loquitur – Effect of application on burden of proof. |
| MANGUT MASHINGIL & ORS V. CHIEF JETHRO M. AKUN & ORS | EVIDENCE:- AFFIDAVIT EVIDENCE:- Whether it is not in all cases where there is no counter Affidavit that a party’s Affidavit in support would be taken as admitted or taken to have established the facts asserted therein – Where the facts deposed are self defeating and do not support the reliefs sought in the motion papers – Duty of court to evaluate properly evaluate affidavit evidence in order to ensure its veracity and or authenticity even where uncontradicted |
| MANUEL V. THE QUEEN | EVIDENCE:- Res Gestae – When dying declaration constitutes |
| MARK A. IROAGBARA V. DAVID UFOMADU | EVIDENCE:– Preponderance of probability – two or more witnesses making irreconcilable statements – weight to attach to such evidence – how determined – applicable principles. |
| MARTCHEM INDUSTRIES NIGERIA LTD. V. M.F. KENT WEST AFRICA LTD. | EVIDENCE:- Proof -Averment in pleading – Where not supported by EVIDENCE:- How treated. |
| MATARI V. DANGALADIMA | EVIDENCE:- Presumption of regularity – What it assumes – When it will not arise. |
| MBANI V. BOSI | EVIDENCE:- What is deemed pivotal evidence – When a witness’s evidence contradict pleadings of party it was intended to support – Effect on credibility of the witness – Duty on the Plaintiff seeking for a declaration of title to land to lead such evidence as would lead a Court to make that declaration in his favour |
| MBELE V. THE STATE | EVIDENCE:- Section 154 of the Evidence Act – Competence of witnesses generally – Competence of any person to testify before a court – Circumstances which may disqualify a person |
| MEIAUDU YUNANA ZURU V. CHIEF OF NAVAL STAFF AND ORS | EVIDENCE:– Court martial – need for same to observe the rule of evidence. EVIDENCE:– Suspicion – whether amounts to evidence. |
| MELFORD AGALA & ORS. V. CHIEF BENJAMIN OKUSIN & ORS | EVIDENCE:- How civil cases are determined – Determination of balance of probability |
| MENIRU V. IGWE | EVIDENCE:- Witness – Cross-Examination – When deemed irrelevant |
| MGBABOR V. THE QUEEN | EVIDENCE:- Accomplice – Corroboration |
| MICHAEL AIWORO V. THE STATE | EVIDENCE:- Corroborative evidence required – Evidence – Opinion of Psychiatrist based on facts obtained from other persons is hearsay. |
| MICHAEL AKPAN V. THE QUEEN | EVIDENCE:- Conviction on evidence of finger print. |
| MICHAEL AROWOLO V. CHIEF TITUS IFABIYI | EVIDENCE:- Standard of proof – Standard of proof where commission of crime is in issue |
| MICHAEL IGBINEDION V. FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA | EVIDENCE:- BURDEN OF PROOF: Whether the onus is squarely on the appellant to prove the existence and terms of the plea bargain agreement |
| MICHAEL IMODU AND NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR LABOUR STUDIES V. SHAIDU NDA’J MALIKI | EVIDENCE:- AFFIDAVIT EVIDENCE:– Where evidence adduced and the documents attached as Exhibits thereto did not raise any dispute of fact – Where no counter-affidavit was filed to contradict the facts averred and the documents attached in support of the originating summons – Whether proper suit to originate and determine by way of originating summons instead of writ of summons EVIDENCE:- AFFIDAVIT EVIDENCE:- AVERMENTS:– Where clear, unambiguous and uncontroverted via any counter-affidavit – Effect – Duty of court thereto |
| MICHAEL ODUNZE V. NWOLU NWOSU(CA) | EVIDENCE – Prof of- Declaration of title – Claim therefor -Identity of land in dispute – When becomes relevant – How proved. |
| MIKA V. QUEEN | EVIDENCE:- Evidence Act, S.96 (1)(c) – Oral evidence of missing confessional statement – Whether admissible to convict maker. |
| MISS HELEN EGBUCHE V. MR. PATRICK OKECHUKWU EGBUCHE | EVIDENCE:- VISIT TO LOCUS IN QUO- Purpose of- When required- What it presupposes- Whether trial court to suo moto embark on a visit to the locus in quo EVIDENCE:- Primary burden of plaintiff to prove his case without reference to the defence – Need for consistent evidence and not contradictory one – Meaning of a truthful witness |
| MOBIL PRODUCING NIG. UNLIMITED V. FRANCIS JOHNSON ASUAH | EVIDENCE:– Section 149(d) of the Evidence Act – Interpretation of |
| MOBIL PRODUCING NIGERIA UNLIMITED V. CHIEF HON. SIMEON MONOKPO | EVIDENCE:– Averments in an affidavit – where not denied – Effect of. |
| MOBIL PRODUCING NIGERIA UNLIMITED V. SIMEON MONOKPO(2) | EVIDENCE:- Evaluation of EVIDENCE:- Exhibits not forming part of record – Whether appellate court can evaluate. |
| MOGAJI. V. CADBURY NIG LTD. | EVIDENCE:- Witnesses – Conflicting testimonies of – When the test in Kojo If V. Bonsie may apply – Evidence at variance with pleadings – Effect of – Evidence of defence supporting plaintiffs case – When plaintiff may take advantage of – Principle in Onubogu V. State – Applicability of |
| MOHAMMAN V. LOCAL GOVERNMENT POLICE | EVIDENCE:- Decision of a Court – How proved in an Area Court – S.131 Evidence Law EVIDENCE:- Admission – Meaning of – 4.19 Evidence Law EVIDENCE:- what is evidence in Area Court. – Divorce – Proof of Moslem divorce |
| MOMO DABIRI V. CHIEF A.B. GBAJUMO | |
| MONDAY NWAEZE V. THE STATE | EVIDENCE:- Admissibility – Confessional statement made through interpreter. Interpreter not called as witness – Whether statement admissible in evidence. |
| MORA V. NWALUSI | EVIDENCE:- Declaration of title – Onus of Proof on Plaintiff. EVIDENCE:- Former proceedings in respect of adjacent land-Weight of evidence. EVIDENCE:- Possession of adjacent land – Section 45 Evidence Act- Effect. |
| MOROHUNFOLA V. KWARA STATE COLLEGE OF TECHNOLOGY | EVIDENCE:- Proof of admitted facts – When dispensed with |
| MOSAKU V. OGUN | EVIDENCE:- Evidence of paramount chiefs – Section 183 of the Evidence Ordinance – Application of EVIDENCE:- Subpoena on paramount chiefs – Principles applicable – Sec. 183 of the Evidence Ordinance |
| MOTUNWASE V. SORUNGBE | EVIDENCE:- Burden of Proof – Declaration of title to land. |
| MOZIE V. MBAMALU | EVIDENCE:- Admissions – Admission in pleadings – How treated. EVIDENCE:- Proof – Burden of proof – Evidential burden of proof – How it operates – Sections 236 and 237, Evidence Act. |
| MR RAPHAEL JEGEDE V. MAYOR ENGINEERING COMPANY LIMITED | EVIDENCE:- BURDEN OF PROOF:- Civil proceedings – On whom lies – Rule that he who asserts must prove – Whether respondent is not obliged to furnish an answer until claimant has proved or made out a case that requires answers – Section 133 (1) (2) of the Evidence Act – Effect |
| MR. AYODELE IGBOKOYI & ORS V. ALHAJI RAHEEM ADETORO LAWAL | EVIDENCE:- AFFIDAVIT EVIDENCE:- Where a party files an affidavit deposing to certain vital facts which are material to the case in dispute – Duty of opposing party to counter those facts by way of counter affidavit – Failure thereto – Whether those facts must be deemed unchallenged and admitted |
| MR. FESTUS OSEMWINGIE & ORS V. MR. OROBOSA OSEMWINGIE & ORS | EVIDENCE:- effect of evidence by a party or of his witness which favours the opponent’s EVIDENCE:- ADMISSION ON OATH: Evidence by a party or of his witness which favours the opponent’s case – Whether a solemn admission in favour of the opponent’s case – Whether what a party admits to be true can reasonably be presumed to be so especially where the admission was made on oath |
| MR. GHASSAN SAIDI & ANOR V. MR. ALAKE OSAROBO IBUDE | EVIDENCE – EVALUATION OF EVIDENCE:- when an appellate Court may embark on a fresh appraisal/evaluation of evidence |
| MR. IBIBIAMA F. G. ODOM & ORS V. THE PDP & ORS | EVIDENCE:- Section 149(d) now Section 167 of the Evidence Act – When court would deem it warranted to invoke the rule that failure to produce evidence after demand means that the evidence would have been detrimental to the party’s interests if produced |
| MR. JULIUS OGHENEVWEGBA BOBI V. MR. EDOJA RUFUS AKPODIETE & ORS | EVIDENCE:- BURDEN OF EVIDENCE:- Duty of plaintiff at the trial to prove his case and all the allegations contained in his affidavit with preponderance of evidence and on the balance of probabilities – Relevant considerations |
| MR. L. A. OHIOWELE V. MR. EDWARD IGHODARO | EVIDENCE – DOCUMENTS:- Treatment of documentary evidence when made available – Whether lends credence to oral evidence of a witness |
| MR. LAMIDI RABIU V. MR. TOLA ADEBAJO | EVIDENCE:- BURDEN OF PROOF: On whom lies the burden of proof in a suit for declaration of title |
| MR. MICHAEL A. OMO V. JUDICIAL SERVICE COMMITTEE OF DELTA STATE | EVIDENCE:– Oral instruction – necessity to be in writing to render evidence on it to be admissible – sections 75, 76 and 148 Evidence Act considered. EVIDENCE:– Rejection of evidence by court– duty of Judge to give reason. |
| MR. OLANREWAJU ADEROUNMU V. MRS. OLABISI OLAIDE ADEROUNMU | EVIDENCE:– Oral instruction – necessity to be in writing to render evidence on it to be admissible – sections 75, 76 and 148 Evidence Act considered. EVIDENCE:– Rejection of evidence by court– duty of Judge to give reason. |
| MR. SAMEHAY HAWAY V. MEDICOWA NIGERIA LTD AND ANOTHER | EVIDENCE:– Burden and standard of proof in a claim for special damages – how discharged. |
| MR. SAMUEL ASONIBARE V. MOHAMMED MAMODU & ANOR | EVIDENCE:- Adversarial proceedings – Purpose of cross-examination – Where party fails to cross-examine and adverse witness – Whether court can take his silence as an acceptance that the party does not dispute the facts |
| MR. SULEMAN MAITO & ORS V. MADAM YEMISI OGUNBODEDE | EVIDENCE:- WEIGHT OF EVIDENCE: Need for judge to first of all put the totality of the testimony adduced by both parties on an imaginary scale with evidence adduced by the plaintiff on one side of the scale and that of the defendant on the other side and weigh them together – What is meant when it is said that a civil case is decided on the balance of probabilities – Other relevant considerations |
| MR. SUNDAY ADEGBITE TAIWO V. SERAH ADEGBORO & ORS | EVIDENCE – JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS:- Judicial admissions are conclusive – implications thereof – Whether where a party agrees to a fact in issue, it is no longer necessary to prove that fact – Duty of a court not to entertain dispute on the fact admitted, after an admission |
| MR. WABILLY NYIAM V. DR. (MRS.) ROSE OKO & ORS | EVIDENCE:- PROOF OF FACT: Whether what is not denied needs no further proof – Section 75 of the Evidence Act, 2004 |
| MR. WILLIAM BALLANTYNE V. HON. ESSIEN EKPENYONG AYI & ORS | EVIDENCE:- AFFIDAVIT EVIDENCE: Whether any deposition in an affidavit not countered or challenged by a counter-affidavit must be accepted and regarded as true |
| MRS FOLASADE OYEWOLE V. MRS. VICTORIA LASISI | EVIDENCE:- Averments and particulars in statement of claim when filed – Whether supersedes the particulars of claim endorsed in the writ of summons – Where a claim is endorsed in the writ of summons but not reflected in the statement of claim is deemed to be abandoned – Whether deemed abandoned and thus unpleaded – Effect of |
| MRS MB AMUSAN V. MR. DANIEL OBIDEYI | EVIDENCE:- When pleadings become evidence |
| MRS. BISI OLALOYE V. MADAM SARATU AKINPELU BALOGUN | EVIDENCE:- Documentary evidence as to title to land – Where available – Whether court precluded from admitting oral evidence of the sale thereto – Section 131(1) of the Evidence Act – Effect |
| MRS. CELILIA KANJAL V. MARY IFOP | EVIDENCE:- Nature of burden of proof in civil cases – Difference between admissible and inadmissible documents- When to object to admissibility of document |
| MRS. COMFORT AKINMOSIN V. MRS. AJOKE MAKINDE & ANOR | EVIDENCE:- BURDEN OF PROOF: The burden of proving service – on whom lies – whether on the person (usually the plaintiff) asserting that there was service – How done – Need to invite the parties to call oral evidence and other vital witnesses – whether once the fact of service is challenged, the bailiff’s affidavit of service was no longer a conclusive or irrefutable proof of service – Whether the issue as to whether a court process was served or not is a question of fact which is discharged by leading oral evidence |
| MRS. ELIZABETH N. ANYAEBOSI V. R.T. BRISCOE (NIG.) LTD | EVIDENCE:- DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE: Exceptions to the rule on the admissibility of documentary evidence EVIDENCE:- SECTION 90(3) OF THE EVIDENCE ACT:- A “person interested” within the meaning of Section 90(3) of the Evidence Act – Meaning of |
| MRS. O.O. LAYADE V. PANALPINA WORLD TRANSPORT NIG. LTD. | EVIDENCE:- Proof-Termination of employment – Where contract of employment provides for notice or salary in lieu for termination – Onus of proof on employer. |
| MRS. RONKE OMIYALE V. MOBOLAJI MACAULAY & ORS | EVIDENCE:- ESTOPPEL PER RES JUDICATA: Plea of estoppel per rem judicatam – whether must be mutually enforceable – principle that “Estoppel is only admitted as part of our law to secure finality in litigation” – One principle inseparable from the doctrine is that it must be mutual – meaning in relation to land transaction – whether Prima Facie, a prior purchaser of land cannot be estopped as being privy in estate by a judgment obtained in an action against the vendor commenced after the purchase |
| MUDA ANWOYI & ORS V. JOHN BANKOLE SHODEKE & ORS | EVIDENCE:- Estoppel: Conditions for application of the principle of Res Judicata |
| MUDU V. THE STATE | EVIDENCE:- Confessional Statement – Voluntariness – Voir dire. |
| MUNZALI AHMADU DANTATA V. ABDULKADIR SANUSI DANTATA | EVIDENCE:– Onus of proof under sections 136 and 137 of Evidence Act – on whom lies – effect of failure to discharge onus. |
| MUSA UMARU KASA V. THE STATE | EVIDENCE:- Admissibility – Statement made by a person not called as witness to a witness – When admissible – When not admissible. EVIDENCE:- Admissibility – Statement made by party whether or not witness to proceedings – Whether admissible – Purpose for which it can be admitted. EVIDENCE:- Admissibility – Statement of accused person to the police – Where it falls short of a confession – Whether admissible per se – Treatment of its contents. |
| MUSILIU TEWOGBADE V. SALIU AGBABIAKA | EVIDENCE – Discovery of document – essence and scope of. |
| MWOKE V. I. G. P. | EVIDENCE:- Admissibility – Prejudicial EVIDENCE:- Attitude of appellate court. |
| N.B.N LTD. V. P.B. OLATUNDE AND CO. LTD | EVIDENCE:- Proof – Averments in pleadings – Where admitted – When evidence need be led in proof of such admitted averments nevertheless. EVIDENCE:- Secondary EVIDENCE:- Existence of contract pleaded – Contract not tendered in evidence – Whether blank “article of agreement “ qualifies as secondary evidence of written agreement. |
| N.E.EKPE V. S.A.FABGEMI | EVIDENCE:- Document tendered an admitted in evidence which was not objected to at the trial cannot be raised on appeal |
| N.I.D.B. V. ADVANCE BEVERAGES INDUSTRIES LTD | EVIDENCE:– Pleadings – evidence led on facts not pleaded – effect of – duty of court not to act on same. |
| N.I.D.B. V. ADVANCE BEVERAGES INDUSTRIES LTD | EVIDENCE:- Uncontroverted EVIDENCE:- Duty on Court to rely on same. |
| N.I.P.C. LTD. V. B.W.A. LTD. | EVIDENCE:- Memorandum to execute legal mortgage – Non registration of – Admissibility of. |
| N.N.S.C. LTD. V. ALH. HAMAJODA SABANA & CO. LTD. | EVIDENCE:- Affidavits – Conflicting affidavits – Need to resolve conflict – Oral evidence – Use of – Inspection of locus by court to resolve conflict – Admissions – Facts with knowledge of person admitting – Effect. |
| N.O. MOTANYA AND OTHERS V. ELIJAH ELINWA AND OTHERS | EVIDENCE:- Admissibility and weight of EVIDENCE:- Distinction between. |
| N.O. OGUNBIYI V. ABDULKADIR ISHOLA | EVIDENCE:- Proof – Trespass and injunction – Party suing therefor – Onus on to establish possessory right. |
| NABHAN V. NABHAN | EVIDENCE:- Evidence required to prove cruelty sufficient to grant divorce – Where a course of conduct derive its cruelty from the cumulative effect of a number of incidents none of which would be sufficiently grave and weighty by itself to constitute the matrimonial offence of cruelty – Need to establish same by evidence |
| NADI V. OSENI | EVIDENCE:– Evaluation of evidence – what it entail’s EVIDENCE:– Evidence adduced during trial – need for trial court to consider the totality of same. |
| NAFIU RABIU V. KANO STATE | EVIDENCE:- Medical evidence – Proof of death – Death due to asphyxia – Need for court not to confuse same with cardiac arrest – Effect of failure thereto |
| NAL MERCHANT BANK PLC V. ODEGHE & ASSOCIATES LTD | EVIDENCE:- Affidavit evidence – defective affidavit – whether can be used by a court under section 84 of the Evidence Act. |
| NANTA ORIANWO & ORS V. L. O. OKENE & ORS | EVIDENCE:- DEFENDANT’S EVIDENCE: Whether the plaintiffs can use the defendant’s evidence to support their case |
| NARINDEX TRUST V. NIDB | EVIDENCE – Bankers book – procedure for giving evidence of entries in same in substantial compliance with section 97(2)(e) of Evidence Act – whether the words of the section must be strictly be followed word by word. |
| NASAMU V. THE STATE | EVIDENCE:- Circumstantial evidence- Need for proof beyond reasonable doubt |
| NASR V. B. BEIRUT-RIYAD NIG. BANK LTD. | EVIDENCE:- Admissibility – Whether exhibit 23 should be regarded as evidence of its contents in view of S.90 of the Evidence Act |
| NASSAR & SONS NIGERIA LTD V. LEDB | EVIDENCE:- Estoppel by conduct – Whether Defendants estopped from pleading defence. |
| NATHANIEL MBENU AND OTHERS V. THE STATE | EVIDENCE:- statement of a witness to the police retracted in court – not evidence upon which the court can act. EVIDENCE:- Tainted witness – Meaning of – Need for caution in treating the evidence of a tainted witness. |
| NATHANIEL OCHIGBO V. IDI UMORU | EVIDENCE:- LOCUS IN QUO: Whether the principles which apply to other parts of the proceedings apply to visits to locus in quo |
| NATIONAL ELECTRIC POWER AUTHORITY, NEPA V. ALLI | EVIDENCE – PLEADINGS: Traverse or denial on pleading – Where evidence in support of assertions in pleadings are not controverted with evidence by party denying or traversing same – Duty of court thereto – Implication for the burden of proof – When would be discharged on minimal proof EVIDENCE:- Admissions – Letters admitting liability for act complained of – When can be deemed sufficient proof of facts alleged |
| NATIONAL ELECTRIC POWER AUTHORITY, NEPA | EVIDENCE:– Burden of proof in civil proceedings – Burden on plaintiff to establish prima facie case before the burden of rebuttal shifts to the defendant – Circumstance in which the need for proof can be dispensed with EVIDENCE:– Uncontradicted and unchallenged evidence – Duty of court to act on same – Whether does not preclude the corollary duty of court to evaluate the evidence for its sufficiency in establishing that which it asserts – Proper treatment |
| NATIONAL ELECTRIC POWER AUTHORITY V. TONY UGBAJA | EVIDENCE:- DOCUMENTS – Admissibility of documents – Documentary evidence – Photocopy of official correspondence by Head of State – Admissibility of in evidence. |
| NATIONAL ELECTRIC POWER AUTHORITY V. INAMETI | EVIDENCE – Burden of proof in civil proceedings – Burden on plaintiff to establish prima facie case before the burden of rebuttal shifts to the defendant. EVIDENCE:– Unchallenged evidence – How treated |
| NDAYAKO V. JIKANTORO AND OTHERS | EVIDENCE:- Admission – Whether needs further proof. EVIDENCE -Evaluation of evidence by trial court- Attitude of appellate Court thereto. |
| NDI OKEREKE ONYUIKE V. THE PEOPLE OF LAGOS STATE & ORS | EVIDENCE:- ILLEGALLY OBTAINED EVIDENCE: Appropriate time to take objection to improperly or illegally obtained evidence – Whether at the hearing of the case when the prosecution applies to put in evidence the improperly or illegally obtained evidence – Sections 14 and 15 of the Evidence Act, 2011 – Whether unfair methods of collecting/assembling evidence for a criminal trial should never be the basis of exclusion of such evidence from the criminal trial, if the evidence so illegally collected is material and/or of substantial weight to the case in question |
| NDOMA-EGBA V. AFRICAN CONTINENTAL BANK PLC. | EVIDENCE:- DOCUMENT-Signature on a document-Where denied by person alleged to have made same -Onus of proof of- On whom lies. EVIDENCE:- Evaluation of EVIDENCE:- Primary function of trial court in respect of. EVIDENCE:- Proof – Handwriting – How proved – Power of trial court to make comparison of signatures or writings independent of expert EVIDENCE:- Scope and limitation of. |
| NDUBOKWU V. CHUKWUMA | EVIDENCE:- Wrongful rejection of admissible evidence – Duty of appellate court thereto |
| NDUBUISI WOMANDA & ORS V. ELDER OWHONDA CHINWO & ORS | EVIDENCE:- AFFIDAVIT OF EVIDENCE: Whether affidavit of service is prima facie proof of matters therein |
| NELSON V. AKOFIRANMI | EVIDENCE:- Presumption – ‘Omnia praesumuntur rite esse acta’ – Application of |
| NEW NIGERIA BANK PLC. V. SOLOMON OWIE | EVIDENCE:- Whether the address of counsel can be a substitute for hard evidence |
| NGWO KALU V. THE STATE | EVIDENCE:- Material Contradictions/Inconsistencies in evidence of witnesses – Effect of – Standard of proof in criminal cases – Doubt always resolved in favour of accused. |
| NIGER CONSTRUCTION LIMITED V. OKUGBENU | EVIDENCE – Nullity – Unchallenged evidence:- Effect on proof – Closing address – Purpose – When court can dispense with – Exercise of discretion to address – Duty of Court – Visit to locus in quo – When undertaken. |
| NIGERIA DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION V. UNION BANK OF NIGERIA PLC. & ANOR | EVIDENCE:- ESTOPPEL: Meaning of estoppel – How established – When the court would refuse to uphold a claim based on estoppel – Interlocutory judgments and the doctrine of estoppel |
| NIGERIA ENGINEERING WORKS LTD V. DENAP LIMITED | |
| NIGERIAN NATIONAL PETROLEUM CORPORATION V. CLIFCO NIGERIA LIMITED | PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – EVIDENCE:- Section 75 of the Evidence Act – Rule that where both parties have agreed on a fact in issue no further proof of such fact is necessary as it is no longer an issue between them –Power of court to exercise discretion requiring that such a fact be proved even though it was admitted – Extent – Justification of PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – EVIDENCE:- Requirement for proof of special damages – Whether can be satisfied by what appears to be an admission thereto – Whether special damages are never inferred from the nature of the act complained of nor follow in the ordinary course as is the case with General damages – Proper treatment of |
| NIGERIA PORTS AUTHORITY V. AKAR | EVIDENCE:- Onus of proof-Goods lost in bailee’s custody -Effect of s.91 on onus. |
| NIGERIA SALT COMPANY LIMITED V. BUREAU FOR PUBLIC ENTERPRISES | EVIDENCE:- Affidavit EVIDENCE:- Provision of section 13 Oaths Act and 1st schedule thereof‑ Need for compliance therewith ‑ Non‑compliance ‑ Effect. EVIDENCE:- Documentary EVIDENCE:- Application before the Court of Appeal after refusal by the trial court ‑ Ruling of trial court not attached to the motion paper ‑ Whether applicant can refer to ruling ‑ Section 132(1) of the Evidence Act |
| NIGERIAN AIR FORCE V. EX.SQN. LEADER A. OBIOSA | EVIDENCE:- Presumptions – Withholding of EVIDENCE:- Presumption raised thereby – Section 149(d), Evidence Act – Rationale therefor-When it will be invoked-When it will not. EVIDENCE:- Proof – Allegation that military officer is engaged in private business contrary to standing orders-How established – Whether mere tendering of form of particulars of directors of company sufficient. |
| NIGERIAN BANK FOR COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY V. INTEGRATED GAS (NIGERIA) LIMITED | EVIDENCE:- Admissions – What constitute – Whether conclusive proof. |
| NIGERIAN BOTTLING CO. PLC V. STEPHEN OBOH | EVIDENCE:– Admitted facts which were never denied – Duty on court to exercise its discretion to require such admitted facts to be proved by some other means. |
| NIGERIAN BREWERIES PLC V. ADETOUN OLADEJI (NIG) LTD. | EVIDENCE:– Burden of proof – nature of burden on plaintiff in civil proceedings. |
| NIGERIAN INTERCONTINENTAL MERCHANT BANK LIMITED V. NARINDEX TRUST LIMITED AND ANOR | EVIDENCE:- Admissibility – Secondary evidence of entries in a banker’s book – Conditions for admissibility thereof – Section 97(2)(e) of the Evidence Act, 1990 considered. |
| NIGERIAN NATIONAL PETROLEUM CORPORATION V. FAMFA OIL LIMITED & ANOR | EVIDENCE – PRESUMPTION: Whether an appellate court ought to presume the judgment or order of a lower court before it as correct and rationale – How rebutted |
| NIGERIAN NATIONAL PETROLEUM CORPORATION V. LUTIN INVESTMENT LTD | PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – EVIDENCE:- Rule that onus of proof is on party who would lose if evidence is not provided on any point in issue – When inapplicable – When rule that he who asserts, must prove applies PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – EVIDENCE:- Judicial notice – Existence, title and national flag of every State or Sovereign recognised by Nigeria – Extent of – Whether restricted to sovereign state and not capital city or city within it – S.74 (1) (f) of the Evidence Act – Interpretation of |
| NIYI AKINMOJU V. THE STATE | EVIDENCE:– Circumstantial evidence – definition and nature of. |
| NKADO V. OBIANO | EVIDENCE:- Evaluation of evidence by trial court – Attitude of appellate court thereto. EVIDENCE:- Proof – Declaration of title to land – Where claim based on traditional history and acts of possession or ownership -Where plaintiff fails to prove traditional history – Effect on reliance on possession and acts of ownership – Whether latter claim sustainable. EVIDENCE:- Proof – Declaration of title to land – Where root of title based on traditional history for proof of – Duty on claimant – Duty on court. |
| NKAMA V. UKA | EVIDENCE:- Res judicata – Identity of land litigated upon – Determination thereof |
| NKEIRUKA JIDEONWO V. THE STATE | EVIDENCE: Proof of crime |
| NKWO V. UCHENDU | EVIDENCE:- Estoppel -Estoppel per rem judicatam – Plea of-Where successfully established – Effect. EVIDENCE:- Issue estoppel – Where particular issues decided by court – Bindingness of on parties and their privies. |
| NMA DOGO V. THE STATE | EVIDENCE – Evidence of a prosecution witness – Where it is contradictory and conflicting – Whether admissible – Treatment of such evidence. |
| NNABUIHE AKOMA EKPO V. CHUKWUEMEKA UKAONU & ORS | REAL ESTATE/LAND LAW – EVIDENCE:- BURDEN OF PROOF:- Where a party admits that his opponent’s ancestors had been the original owners of land in dispute – Whether the onus of proving the change of ownership rests in that party |
| NNAKWE V. THE STATE | EVIDENCE:- PROOF OF DEATH OF A PERSON: Proof of the death of a person – Relevant considerations |
| NNPC & ANOR. V. FAMFA OIL LIMITED | EVIDENCE:- PLEADINGS- effect of a bare denial |
| NSOFOR V. STATE | EVIDENCE:- Confession – Whether a retracted confession is admissible – Confession of an accused – Where it implicates a co-accused – Whether evidence against an accomplice except where adopted – Involuntary confessional statements – Whether a mini trial within a trial would be required to determine admissibility |
| NTEOGWUILE V. OTUO | EVIDENCE – DOCUMENT:- Intelligence report – Meaning of Admissibility of -Section 109, Evidence Act EVIDENCE – DOCUMENT:- Text on custom – Admissibility of- Condition therefor EVIDENCE:- Custom – How proved EVIDENCE:- Custom – Text on custom – Admissibility of- Condition therefor |
| NTITA V. STATE | EVIDENCE:- Proof of Insanity – Burden of proof – How can be discharged – Whether evidence of can come from prosecution witnesses |
| NTOE ANDREW ANSA AND OTHERS V. CHIEF ASUQUO ARCHIBONG ISHIE AND OTHERS | EVIDENCE – DOCUMENT – Document pleaded by party – Where party fails to produce same – Presumption raised thereby. EVIDENCE:- Documentary evidence -Where party pleads document but fails to produce same – Presumption raised. EVIDENCE:- Presumptions – Document pleaded by party – Where party fails to produce same – Presumption raised thereby. EVIDENCE:- Proof – Declaration of title to land – Where based on traditional history and acts of long possession and ownership – Burden on plaintiff – Nature of evidence required to sustain the claim. EVIDENCE:- Proof – Standard of proof in civil cases. |
| NTUKS V. NIGERIAN PORTS AUTHORITY | EVIDENCE-Allegation of fraud in relation to admitted document in earlier suit and raised in subsequent action whether it defeats a plea of Res Judicata EVIDENCE:- Plea of Res Judicata – Governing principles |
| NUHU V. OGELE | EVIDENCE:- Presumption- Limit of the presumption of genuineness of a Court record. |
| NWABIA V. ADIRI | EVIDENCE:- Decision of inter-tribal boundaries settlement tribunal – Res judicata – Whether amounts to. |
| NWABISI V. IDIGO | EVIDENCE:- Estoppel – Section 53 Evidence Act- Absence of decision – Effect. |
| NWABUEZE AND OTHERS V. THE STATE | EVIDENCE:- Burden of Proof in criminal cases – Section 135, Evidence Act – Prosecution’s onus – Conflicting evidence of witnesses extra judicial statement and oral evidence in court – Effect -Alibi – The evidential burden of proof – When an alibi can be properly raised. |
| NWABUOKU V. OTTIH | EVIDENCE:- Oral loan agreement – Document, executed later, setting out terms of original loan – Document described as “mortgage” – Whether document need be registered – Whether document admissible as acknowledgment of debt – Land Registration Ordinance, Cap 99, section 15. |
| NWACHI V. QUEEN | EVIDENCE:- Burden of proof- When discharged. |
| NWADIKE AND OTHERS V. IBEKWE AND OTHERS. | EVIDENCE:- Wrongful admission of EVIDENCE:- Whether question of law – Privilege – Communications and letters expressed “without prejudice” – Scope of protection – Admissibility – Appeals – Grounds of appeal – Error in law – What amounts to – How framed – Trial Court’s failure to consider issues on pleadings – Whether matter of law or otherwise. |
| NWAEGBUABA V. STATE | EVIDENCE:- Witness’s EVIDENCE:- Prosecution witness earlier arrested as suspect -Whether a person with an interest to serve |
| NWALI NNABO V. THE STATE | EVIDENCE:- Insanity – Behaviour of accused as proof of insanity – What to be considered. EVIDENCE-Presumptions- Presumption of sanity -Section 27 Criminal Code – Elements of. EVIDENCE:- Proof of insanity – On whom points lies – How discharged |
| NWANJOKU V. QUEEN | EVIDENCE:- Confession – Evidence falling short of confession – Whether capable of proving charge. |
| NWEHI V. NWAKA | EVIDENCE:- Res judicata – Principles applicable. |
| NWEZE V. THE QUEEN | EVIDENCE:- Accomplice EVIDENCE:- Corroboration of. EVIDENCE:- Of bad character – Wrongful admission of – Effect. |
| NWIGBOKE V. THE QUEEN | EVIDENCE:- Accomplice’s EVIDENCE:- Corroboration of – whether compulsory – practice adopted by Police as prudential guideline – Where not provided for in our law or in any standing orders for the Nigeria Police or in the English Judge’s Rules which have been followed without qualification by the courts of this country – How treated |
| NWOBIALA V. INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE | EVIDENCE: Whether evidence adduced after a submission of no case has been wrongly overruled can be taken into consideration against a person implicated by that EVIDENCE:- Need for prosecution to prove seditious intention |
| NWOBODO EZEDU AND ORS. V. ISAAC OBIAGWU | EVIDENCE:- Presumption of ownership from possession – Absence of evidence in rebuttal – Land claims – Identity of land in dispute clear to both parties – Plaintiff’s right to declaration of entitlement to customary right of occupancy under Land Use Decree |
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