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 RELATING TO PLEADINGS (2)
[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 |
| CARL ZEISS STIFTUNG V RAYNER & KEELER LTD. AND OTHERS (NO. 3) | PLEADINGS:- Amendment of statement of claim – Summons by plaintiff seeking to strike out parts of defences as being res judicatae |
| CHARLES OWOLOGBO UGBOTOR V. FLORENCE MAMUROMU UGBOTOR | ACTION – PLEADINGS: “In any civil matter be it matrimonial, commercial, chieftaincy or one based on land – whether the plaintiff fails or succeeds on his pleadings and the evidence he adduces in support of such pleadings – need for a party who seeks the judgment of the court to be in his favour to adduce such adequate credible evidence in support of his pleading – whether where there is no such evidence then the averment in the pleadings are deemed abandoned |
| CHIEF D. B. AJIBULU v. MAJOR GENERAL D. O. AJAYI | PLEADINGS:- Nature of pleadings – whether an admitted fact is no longer in issue – Whether evidence on the admitted fact is irrelevant and unnecessary PLEADINGS – AVERMENTS AND TRAVERSE:- General denial – Whether in law is not sustainable as it is neither here nor there – whether for a traverse to amount to a denial, it must be explicit, unequivocal and should not leave any one in doubt as to the intention sought to portray |
| CHIEF DAVIDSON OKAFOR IKEANYI V. AFRICAN CONTINENTAL BANK LTD | PLEADINGS:– Bindingness of Pleadings; need for issues and evidence to be within facts pleaded |
| CHIEF HARRISON IYALA AND 2 ORS V. CHIEF AARON F.D. OFFO AND OTHERS | PLEADINGS:– Bindingness of on parties. PLEADINGS:– Defence of estoppel per rem judicatam – How pleaded |
| CHIEF L.K. AJIBARE & ANOR V. JAMES AKOMOLAFE & ANOR | ACTION – PLEADINGS: Use and the effect of pleadings in an action |
| CHIEF OLAIDE ONASANYA & ORS. V. CHIEF KOLAWOLE SODARA & ORS. | |
| CHIEF TITUS ANAMASONYE ONWUGBELU V. MR. EJIOFOR EZEBUO & ORS | PLEADINGS – DAMAGES – SPECIAL DAMAGES AND GENERAL DAMAGES:- Nature of – Distinction – Need for a claim for special damages to be specifically or specially pleaded and strictly proved – Basis of General damages as loss that is the natural or probable result or that can be assumed as likely in the usual course of things to result from such wrongful act complained of and thus do not require to be specifically pleaded and strictly proved |
| CHRISTOPHER N. TANKO V. GARDUGA N. NONGHA | ACTION – PLEADINGS: Whether parties are bound by their pleadings |
| CLIFFORD O. IMOH v. ABIODUN ONANUGA & ANOR | ACTION – PLEADINGS:- Pleadings not being supported by evidence – Whether deemed abandoned ACTION – PLEADINGS:- Essential principle of the rules of pleading in Nigeria’s adversary system – Principle that each party is free to formulate his own case and once formulated he is bound by his pleadings and cannot be allowed to urge a case different from that formulated on the pleadings and the courts themselves are bound to decide only the case formulated on the pleadings and it would be contrary to the proper function of the court to adjudicate on any matter not put in issue by the pleadings – Justification – Implication foe fair hearing |
| DADA V DOSUNMU | PLEADINGS:– Whether parties and the Court are bound by the state of pleadings |
| DALEK NIGERIA LIMITED V OMPADEC | PLEADINGS:– Function of – Bindingness of. |
| DAMIAN ANYANWU v BRENDAN IWUCHUKWU | PLEADINGS:– Evidence led on fact not pleaded – How treated |
| DANIYAN V IYAGIN | PLEADINGS:– Nature of denial in a statement of defence that qualifies as insufficient denial or insufficient traverse. |
| DEACON OYEWO OYELOWO V THE MILITARY GOVERNOR OF OYO STATE | PLEADINGS:– Need to contain only material facts and not the evidence by which they are to be proved. |
| DR. TOSIN AJAYI V. PRINCE (MRS.) OLAJUMOKE ADEBIYI & ORS | ACTION – PLEADINGS: Whether it is a cardinal principle of law that a specific law such as limitation law must be expressly set out or pleaded |
| DR. UMAR ARDO & ANOR v. ADMIRAL MURTALA NYAKO & ORS | ACTION – PLEADINGS:- Binding nature of pleadings |
| DUMEZ NIGERIA LIMITED V. PETER NWAKHOBA & ORS | ACTION – PLEADINGS: Whether judgments must be based on issues joined between the parties |
| E.O. AMODU V. DR. J.O. AMODE | PLEADINGS:– Written pleadings – Need to contain a statement of material facts in a summary form – Effect of failure to so contain – A plaintiff to rely on the strength of his own case and not on the weakness of the defendant’s case. |
| EKAETE BASSEY OKPOSIN & ORS. V. FLORENCE ASSAM (MRS.) & ORS | PLEADINGS:- Duty of Plaintiff on plea of res judicata |
| EKPEZU V NDEM | PLEADINGS:- Bindingness of |
| EKRETSU AND ANOTHER v. OYOBEBERE AND OTHERS | PLEADINGS:- Facts to be pleaded, and not evidence – Evaluation of evidence by trial court – When the appellate court may substitute its own views – Propriety of. |
| ELABANJO V. ALHAJA A. O TIJANI | PLEADINGS:- Issues joined at close of proceedings – Need for parties to only call witnesses in proof or disproof of those issues |
| ELF NIGERIA LIMITED vs. OPERE SILLO AND ANOTHER | PLEADINGS:- Suppression of writ of summons by statement of claim. |
| ELIAS V OMOBARE | PLEADINGS:- Whether a pleaded document must he produced at trial |
| EMEGOKWUE V OKADIGBO | PLEADINGS:- Inconsistency of evidence with pleadings – Duty of trial judge in such circumstances. |
| EMMANUEL T. AYENI and ORS v. WILLIAM ABIODUN SOWEMIMO | PLEADINGS:- bindingness on parties to a suit – Pleading of counsel – Whether binding on the party in the suit in which it is delivered for the purpose of that suit – Effect |
| ENANG AND OTHERS. V. ADU AND OTHERS. | PLEADINGS:- Action in representative capacity – Named plaintiff suing in representative capacity for declaration of title to land as family’s land – Issue on pleadings solely whether or not defendants members of plaintiffs family – Issues as to named plaintiffs headship of his family and his mode of inheritance – irrelevant and wrongly considered by trial court. |
| ENEMUO V DIM | PLEADINGS – failure to lead evidence in support of pleaded facts – effect of. |
| ENIGBOKAN V AKINOSHO | PLEADINGS:- Bad Drafting – Attitude of Court. |
| ETIM JEREMIAH AKPAN v THE REGISTERED TRUSTEES OF QUA IBOE CHURCH OF NIGERIA & ORS. | PLEADINGS:- Averments not supported by evidence |
| ETIM V. ETIM | LEGAL PRACTITIONER AND PLEADINGS:- Using of precedent for drafting provided by leaned authors in books without adaptation to circumstance of case at hand – Where client’s case is prejudiced therefrom – Whether court has discretion to treat same as mistake |
| EVANGELIST JACOB ONAKOVWE KPEKU & ORS. v. CHIEF DOUFA SIBEKENEKUMU & ORS | ACTION – PLEADINGS:- Whether evidence adduced to prove facts ought to be pleaded |
| EWULU V NWANKPU | PLEADINGS:- Evidence of plaintiff – Where at variance with his pleadings – Effect. PLEADINGS:- What ought to he pleaded. |
| EYIFOMI V ISMAIL | PLEADINGS:- Evidence to prove averments – Where not to he pleaded. |
| EZE vs. NWAUBANI | PLEADINGS:- Rules relating thereto – Duty imposed on pleader |
| EZEAKABEKWE V EMENIKE | PLEADINGS:- Amendment of pleadings – Power of Supreme Court in respect thereof – When exercisable – Section 22, Supreme Court Act and Order 8 Rule 12(1), Supreme Court Rules considered – p. 95 |
| EZEKIEL OKOLI V MORECAB FINANCE (NIG.) LTD. | PLEADINGS – Denial in – Need to be direct |
| EZEMBA V IBENEME | PLEADINGS:- Nature of – Standard of proof in civil cases: |
| EZENNAH V ATTA | ACTION – PLEADINGS:- Claim of the existing of Resulting trust – Whether needs to be specifically pleaded as required by the rules of the court? Order 25, rule 5(1) of the Federal Capital Territory High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules 1987 – Distinction between the pleading of material facts as opposed to the pleading of legal result or legal consequence – Whether evidence or arguments or submissions on facts not hitherto pleaded, go to no issue |
| EZEWANI & ORS V ONWORDI & ORS | PLEADINGS:- Aim of Pleadings. |
| EZOMO V OYAKHIRE | PLEADINGS:- Writ of summons – Irregularity – Waiver – Service outside jurisdiction without leave of Judge or court to seal or sign writ, return date on writ earlier than statutorily prescribed date – Defendant entering appearance and contesting case on merits without raising preliminary objection to writ Skenconsult v Ukey and National Bank v. Shoyoye, distinguished |
| EZUKWU V UKACHUKWU | PLEADINGS:- Averments in pleadings – Whether party bound to prove all. |
| EZULUMERI OHIAERI vs ADINNU AKABEZE | PLEADINGS:- Facts not pleaded go to no issue – Parties bound by their pleadings – Lack of jurisdiction by court -Action to be struck out – Respondent’s notice and cross-appeal – Failure of court to pronounce on a matter – Party aggrieved by such failure – To come by way of cross appeal. |
| F.C.D.A. V. NAIBI | PLEADINGS:- When pleadings are abandoned – Effect of such abandonment Whether pleadings constitute evidence – Whether law is required to be pleaded special. defences Must be pleaded. |
| FAKOYA v. ST. PAUL’S CHURCH, SHAGAMU | PLEADINGS:- Admission of facts raised in statement of claim – Effect. |
| FALAJU V AMOSU | PLEADINGS:- Pleadings in land cases – Admissibility of family head’s evidence of non-consent to sale, even though head’s identity not specifically pleaded – Witnesses – Insufficient per- se as ground for reversal of High Court’s findings. |
| FASORO AND ANOTHER. V. BEYIOKU AND OTHERS II | PLEADINGS:- Making a different case from that pleaded – Effect – Appeals – Formulating issues for determination different from those relied on at court below – Effect, briefs of argument – Guideline for formulation of question for determination. |
| FEDERAL POLYTECHNIC BAUCHI & ANOR v. ABDULFATTAH ABOABA & ANOR | ACTION – PLEADINGS AND ADDRESS OF COUNSEL:- Address of counsel – Whether cannot be used to raise issues which do not emerge from the pleadings and evidence – Whether in order to determine whether an action is statute barred or not, the court must be involved in the arithmetic exercise of calculation of years, months, and days to the minutest detail |
| FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY, MINNA & ORS v. DR. (MRS) ADAEZE G.N.C. OKOLI | ACTION – PLEADINGS:- Defence that an action is statute barred – Whether a special defence like fraud, estoppel, res judicata, etc which must be pleaded specifically in either statement of defence or counter affidavit as the case may be, by a defendant before it can be relied upon in any proceedings – Whether Public Officers (Protection) Act as a limitation statute falls into the same category – Justification |
| FELIX CHINDA V AMADI | PLEADINGS:- Evidence which is at variance with pleadings – Effect of. PLEADINGS:- Issue not joined in the pleadings – Trial – Judge making a finding thereon – Whether proper. |
| FIDELIS MGBENWA & ORS v. KINGSLEY NNAGU & ANOR | ACTION – PLEADINGS: Plea of estoppel per rem judicatam – Where rendered a special defence after the abolishment of the plea of demurrer – Order 22 of the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2006 of Rivers State – Need for same to be specifically pleaded – Effect of failure thereto |
| FIRST AFRICAN TRUST BANK LTD vs. PARTNERSHIP INVESTMENT CO. LTD | PLEADINGS:- Bindingness of. |
| FIRST BANK OF NIGERIA PLC VS OBANDE OBEYA | PLEADINGS:- Whether amending of pleadings amounts to new cause of action |
| FOMBO V RIVERS STATE HOUSING AND PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY | COURT – PLEADINGS: Writ of Summons and Statement of Claim – Duty of trial court to limit itself to competent pleadings not proposed amendments thereto which were not moved and adopted – |
| FOREIGN FINANCE V L.S.D.P | PLEADINGS:- Invalidation of revocation of right of occupancy – Effect of failure to plead grounds of invalidity – Parties – Joinder – Effect of non joiner of State Government in a case involving invalidation of a revocation of right of occupancy. |
| GABRIEL IWUOHA V NIGERIAN POSTAL SERVICES LTD. | PLEADINGS:- Averments not denied therein – Effect of. Pleadings – evidence not pleaded or at variance with pleadings – rule governing same. |
| GANIYU OGUNDIPE v. SAMSON MURAINA ODUWAIYE & ANOR | ACTION – PLEADINGS:- Whether by the rules of pleadings, a party is not required to plead the contents of a document but the effect of the document on the case – Duty of court thereto |
| GASALIYU OLA-IYA V. ALHAJI YAKUBU LASISI | ACTIONS – PLEADINGS:- Requirements that court processes be signed by legal practitioner and not by a law firm – Basis – Provision of section 24 of the Legal Practitioners Act – Rule in Nweke vs. Okafor and Oketade vs. Adewunmi – Whether cannot be waived by parties or even by the court being mandatory as opposed to directory or discretionary ACTIONS – PLEADINGS:- Conditions precedent to the hearing of an action initiated in court – Processes made incompetent by virtue of non-compliance with requisite statutory stipulations – Whether of the same nature as voidable processes like irregular service of valid/competent court processes which is at the discretion of the party served to pursue – Whether compliance with section 24 of the Legal Practitioners Act, 1990 is of such fundamental importance to the judicial process that it cannot be waived even by consent or by the court |
| GEORGE V. DOMINION FLOUR MILLS | PLEADINGS:- Aim of – Amendment of to plead illegality – When will be granted PLEADINGS:- Contract – Illegality of – Where not pleaded – Attitude of court thereto. PLEADINGS:- Evidence – Adducing evidence of fact not pleaded – Effect. |
| GLOVER V ABARI | PLEADINGS:- Evidence led during trial – Discrepancy between it and pleadings – Effect. |
| GREAT NIGERIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED V LADGROUPS LIMITED | PLEADINGS:- General principles of – Insurance – Excess Clause in valued policy – Whether must be pleaded. |
| HASSAN AND ORS V. ALHAJI SUFIANU AMINU AND ORS | PLEADINGS:- Unpleaded document – Whether can be tendered in evidence. |
| HASSAN V MAIDUGURI MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE | PLEADINGS:- Issues raised in pleadings ‑ Duty on Court to confine itself thereto. Pleadings ‑ Traverse ‑ How made. |
| HASSAN Vs. JAURO | PLEADINGS:- Binding nature of pleadings on parties PLEADINGS:- Need for court not to deviate from the case made by each party in their pleadings. |
| HAWAY V. MEDICOWA NIGERIA LTD. | PLEADINGS:- What it must contain PLEADINGS:- Need to specify particulars of damages – Effect of failure. |
| HON. MKPANAM OBO-BASSEY EKPO & ANOR v. NGIM OKPOR KANU & ORS. | EVIDENCE AND PLEADINGS:- Whether parties are bound by their pleadings |
| HONIKA SAWMILL (NIG.) LTD, V HOFF | 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. PLEADINGS:- Defendant admitting averment in plaintiffs pleadings – Effect. PLEADINGS:- Function of – Whether can replace evidence required to prove facts pleaded. |
| I.B.W.A. LTD V. UNAKALAMBA | PLEADINGS:- Duty on court to confine itself thereto |
| I.T. ADENUGA V ILESANMI PRESS AND SONS (NIG.) LTD. | PLEADINGS:- Bindingness of – Matter not pleaded – How treated. |
| IBADAN CITY COUNCIL AND ANOTHER. V. AJANAKU | PLEADINGS:- Basis on which action fought in the court of trial – New case on appeal – Whether permissible |
| IBANGA V USANGA | PLEADINGS:- Amendment of – Whether matter which arose in the course of proceedings can be incorporated into the pleadings by way of amendment – Judgment and its binding eject – The desirability of cases being tried on issues specifically pleaded – Judicial support through several decisions of the Supreme Court |
| IBEANU v OGBEIDE | PLEADINGS:- Material allegations in statement of claim – How traversed – whether a general traverse will suffice Pleadings – Evidence led on facts not pleaded – How treated |
| IBRAHIM KANO V. GBADAMOSI OYELAKIN | PLEADINGS:- Defendant relying oil illiteracy – Need to plead some. PLEADINGS:- Defendant relying oil special defence – Need for him to specifically plead same. |
| IDAHOSA V ORONSAYE | PLEADINGS:- Necessity for pleading matters of defence in trial Court. |
| IDAKULA V RICHARDS | PLEADINGS:- Necessity for pleading matters of defence in trial Court. |
| IFOP V. C.B.N | PLEADINGS:- Inexpertly drafted nonsuit Appeal – How treated by court |
| IGBINOKPOGIE V OGEDEGBE | PLEADINGS:- Bindingness of – Evidence led on fact not pleaded – How treated. |
| IGE V AKOJU | PLEADINGS:- Evidence at variance with pleadings – How treated. PLEADINGS:- Evidence led on facts not pleaded – How treated |
| IHEANACHO V. CHIGERE | PLEADINGS:- Pleadings of parties – bindingness of |
| IKOKU V OLI | PLEADINGS:- Malicious Prosecution – Allegation that charge was false but not that it was false to the knowledge or belief of defendant – Whether amounts to allegation of crime pleaded |
| ILIYASU HONG v FEDERAL MORTGAGE FINANCE LTD | PLEADINGS:- amendment of pleadings – principles governing the amendment of |
| ILIYASU UMAR V BAYERO UNIVERSITY, KANO | PLEADINGS: -Matters not canvassed by parties – Admissibility of – Effect. |
| ILONA Vs. IDAKWO | PLEADINGS:- Defences of estoppel or acquiescence – Failure to plead – Effect of. |
| IMANA V. ROBINSON | PLEADINGS:- Once pleadings have been settled, and issues joined – Duty of the court to proceed to the trial of the issues – Where one party fails or refuses to submit the issues he has raised in his pleadings for trial by giving or calling evidence in their support Whether trial judge must, unless there are other legal reasons dictating to the contrary, resolve the case against the defaulting party |
| INDEPENDENT AUTOMATIC SALES V. KNOWLES | PLEADINGS:- Practice – Pleadings – Law, point of – Whether to be pleaded if raised as preliminary point – R.S.C., Ord. 19, r. 4; Ord. 25, rr. 2, 3. PLEADINGS:- Practice – Preliminary point – Pleading – Whether point of law need be pleaded – R.S.C., Ord. 19, r. 4; Ord. 25, rr. 2, 3. |
| INSURANCE BROKERS OF NIGERIA V. ATLANTIC TEXTILES MANUFACTURING COMPANY LIMITED | PLEADINGS:- Averment contained therein – Treatment of-Whether constitutes evidence –Need for evidence in proof of. |
| IPINLAIYE II V OLUKOTUN | PLEADINGS:- Documentary evidence – Whether needs to be specifically pleaded – Party seeking to rely on document – How to plead same. PLEADINGS:- Rules governing – Fact not pleading – Evidence given thereon – How treated – Where such evidence wrongly admitted – How treated on appeal. |
| ISAAC EZEKIEL v WESTMINISTER DREDGING NIGERIA LIMITED | PLEADINGS:- Disparity between claims in the writ of summons and the Statement of Claim – Effect of – How treated. |
| ISERU V CATHOLIC BISHOP WARRI DIOCESE | PLEADINGS:- Facts not pleaded – Evidence thereon – How treated. |
| ISHOLA V SOCIETE GENERALE BANK (NIG.) LIMITED | PLEADINGS:- Reply to statement of defence – Function of – When necessary to file – When not necessary. |
| ISHOLA V UNION BANK OF NIGERIA LIMITED | PLEADINGS:- Issue not raised in pleadings – Duty on court not to grant reliefs regarding same – Issues not joined in pleadings – Proper treatment of PLEADINGS:- Matters required to be specifically pleaded – Effect of failure thereto PLEADINGS:- Illegality – Need for same to be specifically pleaded – Effect of failure thereto |
| ISO Vs. ENO | PLEADINGS:- Equitable defences – Where sought to be relied upon – Need to plead fully with particulars |
| ITA V. DADZIE | PLEADINGS:- Wills and probate proceedings – Propriety of court acceding to application to amend pleadings to plead due execution of the Will after the parties had closed their cases |
| ITO V EKPE | PLEADINGS:- Principles relating to bindingness of pleadings in respect of evidence – How applied – Effect PLEADINGS:- Contents of pleadings – Need to plead facts and liberty to raise points of law therein PLEADINGS:- Estoppel – requirement that it be specially pleaded – What amounts to sufficient pleading of – Whether no particular form required under modern rules – Whether sufficient to plead facts and circumstances of relevant previous judgments. |
| IWEKA V. S.C.O.A. NIGERIA LIMITED | PLEADINGS:- Amendment of at Court of Appeal – Guiding principles – Relisting – Motion struck out by trial court – Whether can be relisted by the Court of Appeal |
| IYAKIN V GBAJUMO | PLEADINGS:- What it should disclose. |
| J. E. ELUKPO AND SONS LTD. v. F.H.A. | PLEADINGS:- Failure to lead evidence on averments in pleadings – Failure to specifically deny averments in statement of claim – Consequence of – Need for proper traverse. PLEADINGS:- Simple denial of averments contained in statement of claim – When deemed sufficient. |
| JACOB BANKOLE & ORS v. AMODU TIJANI DADA | ACTION – PLEADINGS: Effect of pleadings on parties and the Court |
| JAMES V. MID-MOTORS NIGERIA CO. LTD. | PLEADINGS – Whether failure to aver vicarious liability in pleadings is fatal – Whether plaintiff entitled to land evidence on vicarious liability without said averment – Whether court should not disregard it – Importance of pleadings – Necessity for pleadings to be complete, comprehensive and accurate – Order 7 rule 13(I) & (2) of the Rules of the Supreme Court 1961 – necessity for the giving of notice under said rule 13(1). |
| JATAU V AHMED AND ORS. | PLEADINGS:- retrospective effect of amendment of same. |
| JERRY O. IMOTO V. H.F.P. ENGINEERING NIG. LIMITED | PLEADINGS:- Writ of summons – Whether superceded by statement of claim. |
| JESSICA TRADING CO. LTD V. BENDEL INSURANCE CO. LTD. | PLEADINGS:- Amendment of pleadings – Principles governing the grant of. |
| JIMONA LTD. v. N.E.C. CO. LTD. | PLEADINGS:- Purpose of – Statement of Defence – General traverse – Effect PLEADINGS:- Statement of Defence – Plea in the alternative – Whether permissible. |
| JOE GOLDAY CO. LIMITED V CO-OPERATIVE DEVELOPMENT BANK PLC | PLEADINGS:- Averments in pleadings not specifically denied – Whether deemed admitted. |
| JOLAYEMI V ALAOYE | PLEADINGS:- Bindingness of – Evidence on fact not pleaded – How treated. PLEADINGS:- Evidence in support of pleadings – How treated – Duty on court. |
| JOSEPH AGBAHOMOVO AND ORS V. APATA EDUYEGBE | PLEADINGS:- Amendment of – Effect of – Status of previous pleadings after an amended pleading is filed – Whether still part of proceedings and therefore admissible and proper for consideration for any purpose. |
| JOSEPH AGBON OJEME vs. PRINCE MARK JIMOH MOMODU | PLEADINGS:- Claim for defamation |
| JOSEPH IFETA V SHELL PETROLEUM DEVELOPMENT COMPANY OF (NIG). LTD | PLEADINGS:- Failure of party to adduce evidence in support of pleadings – Consequence of. |
| JOSHUA GUTING v. TUNYANG DAVWANG | PLEADINGS:- Signing of legal documents and processes of courts – Whether by virtue of section 2 (1) and 24 of the Legal practitioners Act only a person enrolled to practice as a solicitor and Advocate in Nigeria can sign court processes – Whether a question of procedure or jurisdiction – Whether any court process including Brief(s) of Argument in appeal matters signed by any other person or organization shall be rendered null and void and would be discountenanced by the relevant Court |
| JULIUS BERGER NIGERIA PLC & ANOR v. MRS. DOLAPO OGUNDEHIN | ACTION – PLEADINGS:- General rule of pleadings – Parties are bound by their pleadings – Effect of rule – Whether it is not open for a party to depart from his pleadings in order to put up an entirely new case at the hearing – Whether learned trial Judge can depart from the deposition and pleadings of the parties – Whether the Court and the parties are bound by the facts set out in their respective pleadings – Whether a party will be allowed at the trial to call evidence to support his pleadings – Evidence which deliberately or through inadvertence was allowed contrary to a party’s pleading – whether must be expunged by the learned trial Judge when considering the case of both parties |
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