CASES/JUDGMENTS OF NIGERIAN COURTS ON COURT PRACTICES AND PROCEDURES (9)
POLICY, PRACTICE & PUBLISHING LAW REPORTS, 3PLR
FIND JUDGMENTS BY:
CASES/JUDGMENTS OF NIGERIAN COURTS ON COURT PRACTICES AND PROCEDURES (9)
[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 |
| JEREMIAH AKOH AND OTHERS V. AMEH ABUH | COURT – Jurisdiction – Area Courts – Stay of proceedings. |
| JERIC NIGERIA LIMITED V. UNION BANK OF NIGERIA PLC. | COURT – Power to grant reliefs – limitations on the exercise of power. ‘ |
| JESSICA TRADING CO. LTD V. BENDEL INSURANCE CO. LTD. | COURT – Record of trial court – Amendment of – Poster of appeal court in respect of – When it will be exercised. |
| JETHWANI V. NIGERIA WIRE IND. PLC | COURT – Illegality – Whether court will aid. |
| JIMI ODUBA V. C. V. SCHEEPV AARTONDERNEMING HOUTMANGRACHT | COURT -Costs – Power of court to order plaintiff to give security for defendant’s costs in an action – How exercised – Principles governing. COURT – Exercise of discretion -Duty on court in respect thereof – Need to advert to all facts and circumstances of particular case. COURT- Exercise of discretion to grant application seeking to compel plaintiff to give security for-defendant’s cost in an action- Principles guiding |
| JIMOH GARUBA V. ISIAKA YAHAYA | COURT – Native, area and customary courts:- The attitude of appellate courts to native and customary courts. |
| JIMOH SOWOLE V. RAIMI EREWUNMI | COURT – Supreme Court (Civil Procedure) Rules O. XXXII r. 19—Application to strike out Statement of Claim alleging slander in foreign language—Attitude of court thereto COURT – When courts will order leave to amend in lieu of an application to strike out the pleading |
| JOB CHARLES (NIG.) LTD. Vs. OKONKWO | COURT:- Processes – Necessity of – Effective service of court processes on a defendant. |
| JOE ADOLO OKOTIE-EBOH & ANOR V. MRS ALERO JADESIMI & ORS | COURT – POWER OF AN APPELLATE COURT:- When an Appellate Court can assume control over proceedings between parties |
| JOE UWAGBA V. FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA | COURT – DUTY OF COURT:- Duty of court to interpret the law as it is |
| JOHN AMABARA & ANOR. V. CUSTOMARY COURT, OPOBO & ORS. | COURT – POWER OF COURT:- Whether a court has the power to set aside or quash any proceedings not before it |
| JOHN AND DAN V. THE STATE | COURT – HIGH COURT:- Sparse judgment – essential preliminary to conviction – Need for court to keep documentary record of the review of evidence and review of defence made before – Effect of failure to do so |
| JOHN PETER (ALIAS IKIRI PETER) V. THE STATE (SC) | COURT:- Criminal trial – Defence of alibi – Where raised by accused – Duty on court. |
| JOHNSON AND ANOTHER V. THE STATE | COURT – Court and right of appeal – Interpretation of statutes – Repeal of enactment conferring right of appeal – Whether accrued right of appeal unaffected. |
| JOHNSON DANIA V. THE STATE | COURT – Presumption of sound mind – Onus of Proof of defence of intoxication or insanity – Section 140 (3) (c) Evidence Act. |
| JOMBO V. PEF | COURT:- Jurisdiction of Court – Power to determine whether own jurisdiction has been ousted – Need for court to guard its jurisdiction jealously COURT:- Legislation seeking to restrict or oust the jurisdiction of the Court – Duty of court to construe same strictly and narrowly – Rule that ouster of Court’s jurisdiction is not a matter of course – Application – Duty of party asserting ouster of claim to show that the particular action falls within the ouster clause |
| JONES V. NATIONAL COAL BOARD | COURT – Judge – Conduct of – Evidence of witnesses – Interventions by judge – Roles of judge and advocate. |
| JOSEPH EWETE V. PAUL GYANG | COURT – Constitution of High Court – laws providing that a High Court shall be made up of two or more Judges – whether constitutional. COURT – High Court – competence of a single Judge to hear an interlocutory application under section 116(1) (a) of the High Court Laws of Northern Nigeria Cap. 49 and the High Court (Interlocutory Applications in Appellate Matters) Rules – whether an application for leave to appeal from the High Court to the Court of Appeal qualities as an interlocutory application under same. |
| JOSEPH OBI V. BIWATER SHELLABEAR NIGERIA LIMITED AND JOSEPH O. YANGE | COURT:- Double compensation – Meaning |
| JOSEPH TUMINI OGOLO V. CHIEF L.L.B. OGOLO | COURT – Extension of time to file statement of defence – applicable principles guiding court in consideration of. |
| JOSHUA GUTING V. TUNYANG DAVWANG | COURT – EVALUATION OF EVIDENCE:- Trial court – Primary responsibility of the trial court to fully consider in totality the evidence of both parties placed before the court – Need for the trial Judge to put the evidence on the imaginary scale of justice and weigh it to determine the party in whose favour the scale tilts by making necessary finding of facts and then come to a logical conclusion – Effect of failure thereto |
| JOSHUA V. FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA | COURT – Section 33 (6) (a) of the 1979 Constitution and section 215 of the Criminal Procedure Law designed to ensure fair trial of an accused person – Duty on trial courts to comply with same. |
| JOSIAH CORNELIUS LIMITED & ORS V. CHIEF CORNELIUS OKEKE EZENWA | COURT – JUDGEMENT:- effect of judgement given by a court without jurisdiction. |
| JOV V. DOM | COURT – Area Courts – Jurisdiction of in respect of land subject of customary right of occupancy – Whether extant – Section 41 of the Land Use Act. COURTS – Native courts – Proceedings of – Attitude of appellate court thereto – Need to consider substance of – Rationale therefor |
| JULIANA IBIYEMI AKINBINU V. YISA EYIFUNMI OSENI & ANOR | COURT – JURISDICTION:- Effect of pronouncement made by court where it lacks jurisdiction |
| JULIUS BERGER NIGERIA PLC & ANOR V. MRS. PHILOMENA UGO | COURT:- – Duty of Court when it needs to rely on a new point or issue not argued before it – Whether highly irregular for the lower Court to have refused to ascribe probative value to Exhibits after admitting same into evidence without giving opportunity to Counsel to address it upon same before taking its decision |
| JUMANG SHELIM & ANOR V. FWENDIM GOBANG | COURT – JURISDICTION:- What it means, its significance and how derived by an appellate court |
| JUMOSIMA WARI & ORS V. MOBIL INC OF AMERICA & ANOR | COURT – POWER OF CHIEF JUDGE:- Whether the Chief Judge of Federal High Court has the power to make rules to regulate the procedure and practice of the Federal High Court particularly with respect to issuance and service of writ of summons on a person outside each state COURT – DUTY OF COURT – JURISDICTION:- Duty of Court to first consider and determine objection raised to its jurisdiction to entertain a matter, before any other process – Whether a ground of appeal that complains about the proper order a court of law is required to make after a finding that it lacks the necessary jurisdiction to entertain a matter brought before it, is one of fact |
| JUSTICE PARTY V. INDEPENDENT NATIONAL ELECTORAL COMMISSION (INEC) | COURT:– Technicalities – Court insisting on forms rather than substance – effect of. |
| K. IDOWU AND ORS. V. A. AKINWUNMI AND ORS. | COURT – Technicalities – court insisting on forms rather than substance – effect of. |
| K. MAERTSCH & ORS V. OLA BISIWA | COURT – RIGHT AND DUTY OF COURT:- Rule that it is the right and even the duty of a trial judge to raise an issue suo motu in pursuit of justice – Limits of propriety – Whether it is not proper for a court to consider an issue raised suo motu unless it has afforded all parties an opportunity of addressing it on same |
| KABIRU MUSA RANGAZA V. MICRO PLASTIC COMPANY LIMITED | COURT – DUTY OF COURT:- “Duty of Court to give effect to the agreement between the parties and not re-write same – Whether applies even if the contract is inelegantly or ineptly couched |
| KABO AIR LIMITED V. THE O’ CORPORATION LIMITED | COURT – FEDERAL HIGH COURT:- Section 6 (1) (3) (5) (c) , of the 1999 Constitution – Jurisdiction of the Federal High Court as a superior court of record to register foreign judgments in Nigeria – Enabling Statute – Section 2 and 4 of the Act COURT – FEDERAL HIGH COURT:- Exclusive jurisdiction to entertain matters pertaining to aviation/ aircraft – whether extends to registration foreign judgments arising therefrom COURT – RAISING ISSUES SUO MOTU:- When a court can take an issue and decide on it suo motu without hearing parties – Where the issue relates to the court’s own jurisdiction – Where both parties are/were aware or ignored a statute which may have a bearing on the case undr Section 73 of the Evidence Act – When on the face of the record serious questions of the fairness of the proceedings is evidence – Whether such cases does not amount to denial of fair hearing |
| KALE V. COKER | COURT:- Determination of issues – Duty of court to rely on legally admissible evidence – whether court has no discretion to act on evidence made inadmissible by the express provision of a statute even by consent of parties |
| KALU MARK V. GABRIEL EKE | COURT-Judgment of court – Judgment given on the merits – When can be set aside by same court. COURT – Jurisdiction of court – Ingredients of. COURT- Service of court process – Fundamental nature of- Where service not effected – Effect on proceedings of court and judgment – Remedy open to party not served. |
| KALU V. ODILI | COURT – Rules of Court – Need for compliance with – When departure can be permitted – English judicial departure can be permitted – English judicial decisions – How treated by Nigerian Courts. |
| KALU V. STATE | COURT:- Death penalty – Whether within power of court to abolish. COURT:- Industry of counsel – Appreciation of by court COURT:- Supreme Court – Whether has original jurisdiction to entertain suit seeking to et force fundamental rights – Ogugu V. State (1994) 9 NWLR (PT. 366) 1; Effiom V. State (1995) I NWLR (PT. 373) 507 followed |
| KANO STATE OIL AND ALLIED PRODUCTS LIMITED | COURT:- Issue before the court – Need for court to confine itself thereto – Duty on court not to make case for parties. |
| KANO TEXTILE PRINTERS PLC V. GLOEDE AND HOFF NIGERIA LIMITED | COURT:– Functus officio – When a court is deemed to be functus officio – Remedy available to a party aggrieved by a ruling when a court becomes functus officio. |
| KARIBO V. GREND | COURT:- Action for declaration of title – Evaluation of evidence and findings of fact – Procedure to be adopted by trial court – Mogaji V. Odofin (1978) 4 S.C. 37 revisited. COURT – Duty on trial court to make findings – When it arises – When it does not arise COURT – Duty on trial court to make findings on important and material issues -. Failure to carry out – Course open to appellate court. |
| KASIOBI NWANKUDU V. ENOCK IFEZUO IBETO | COURT – Duty to consider all applications before it – Duty to consider the evidence of all sides in a case concerning every material issue – Duty to express in writing whether it agreed with the objection or it did not – Duty to hear a motion or process before it |
| KASSAB V. ULASI | COURT:- Consolidation of cases – Conditions precedent – Duty on court in respect thereof. COURT:- Exercise of discretion – What to consider |
| KAYODE OKUOJA V. OBAFUNMILAYO ISHOLA | COURT – DUTY OF COURT:- Finding of facts by trial court – Advantages enjoyed by trial judge – Attitude of appellate court to invitation to interfere with such findings |
| KEITH SPICER LTD. V. MANSELL | COURT – Court of Appeal – Fact, question of – Appeal from lower court – Inference from primary facts – Mixed law and fact – Claim in county court for price of goods sold and delivered – Value less than £150 – Goods ordered by one of two persons carrying on business prior to formation of company – Claim by seller against other person as partner – Judge’s finding that no partnership in existence – Whether a right of appeal. |
| KEN SARO-WIWA V. ATTORNEY GENERAL | COURT:- Whether court of appeal can grant application for bail made in the first instance – Section 219 of the 1979 Constitution |
| KENNETH NDUKA AGBAKWURU & ANOR V. HON. RAPHAEL NWANNA IGBOKWE & ANOR | COURT – POWER OF COURT:- The special powers granted the Court of Appeal under Section 16 of the Court of Appeal Act, 2011 |
| KERIAN IKPARA OBASI V. MIKSON ESTABLISHMENT INDUSTRIES LTD. | COURT – POWER OF COURT:- Whether the supreme court has inherent power to amend the record of the trial court |
| KHALIL V. MUSA YARADUA | COURT:- Rules of court Need for compliance therewith. COURT:- Rules of court Need to be obeyed. |
| KIGO (NIGERIA) LTD V. HOLMAN BROTHERS (NIGERIA) LTD. | COURT:- Power to grant or order Stay – Whether inherent – Basis in statute – When court would not grant stay – When lower court grants Stay of its judgment already on appeal at a higher court – Whether not tantamount to sitting as a court of appeal over their own decision – Whether merely a preservative order |
| KOLAWOLE V. ALBERTO | COURT:- Rules of the High Court of England – Applicability of in Nigeria |
| KOREDE V. ADEDOKUN | COURT – Raising issue suo motu – discretion of Court of Appeal to raise issue suo motu in exceptional circumstances – need for the court to hear parties before deciding on the issue. |
| KOSOFE LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA & ORS. V. CHIEF T. ABAYOMI DAVIES | COURT – RULES OF COURT:- Whether rules of court are used by courts to discover and not to choke justice |
| KRAUS THOMPSON ORGANIZATION V. NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR POLICY AND | COURT – Duty to give plain wordings of a statute their ordinary interpretation. |
| KRAUS V. BRIGHT-ORIDAMI | COURT – Document not pleaded – Whether court can order production of. DAMAGES – Award of – When appellate court will not disturb. DAMAGES – Special damages – Must be specially pleaded and proved. EVIDENCE – Document not pleaded – Attitude of court. |
| KUDU V. ALIYU | COURT ‑ Findings of fact or inference drawn on proved facts by trial court ‑ When appellate court will interfere therewith. COURT ‑ Raising issue suo otu ‑ Duty on court where it does so. |
| KUFORIJI AND ANOTHER V. V.Y.B. (NIG.) LTD. | COURT:- Civil proceedings – Whether it is an abuse of the process of court to sue for rescission only to turn round to affirm the contract of sale to the person who made the misrepresentation |
| KUPOLUYI V. PHILLIPS | COURT – Court of Appeal – judicial discretion and attitude of the Court of Appeal thereto. COURT – Award of costs to a successful party – attitude of appellate courts thereto. |
| KUTI V. ATUNRASE | COURT – Trial court misdirecting itself – Effect thereof |
| KUWAIT OIL TANKER COMPANY SAK AND OTHERS V. UBS AG | COURT: |
| KWAJAFFA V. BANK OF THE NORTH LIMITED (SC) | COURT-Evaluation of evidence by trial court-Rules governing- Duty on trial court in respect of-How discharged-Respective positions of trial and appellate courts with respect to. COURT – Supreme Court – Appeal thereto – Need to arise from decision of Court of Appeal – Nature and scope of appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. |
| L.S.D.P.C. AND ANOTHER V. NIGERIAN LAND AND SEA FOODS LTD | COURT – Purpose of Order 6, rule 8(6) Supreme Court Rules – Construction and effect of Order 8, rule 14(2) Supreme Court Rules. |
| LAHAN V. AREMU | COURT- Trial Judge forming unfavourable view of conduct of one of the parties during trial – Whether entitled to say so in his judgment – Duty of court in relation thereto COURT – Excessive criticism – Duty of Judge to avoid |
| LAIBRU LTD V. BUILDING & CIVIL ENG. CONT. | COURT – Rules of the Supreme court of the Judicature (England) 0.16, r.2 – High Court of Lagos Act cap.80, s.12 Supreme Court (Civil Procedure) Rules 0.1V. |
| LARMIE V. DATA PROCESSING MAINTENANCE & SERVICES (DPM) LTD. | COURT:- Trial Judge – Whether everything a trial Judge says is appealable. |
| LASISI ADEGBESAN ABIMBOLA V. SAKA ABATAN | COURT:- Court raising issues suo motu without hearing the parties – Propriety of. |
| LASISI OGBE V. SULE ASADE | COURT – DUTY OF COURT:- Whether Courts are obliged to decide issues not placed before them by the parties |
| LASISI V. ADU | COURT – Jurisdiction-Magistrates’ Court—Criminal proceedings brought by an individual-Conditions precedent to the exercise of jurisdiction by Magistrates’ Court COURT:- Jurisdiction – Court of trial given a discretion to exercise-Record must show that Court was aware of this power and took the step it took in exercise of such power. |
| LATEEF SHOFOLAHAN V. THE STATE | COURT – DUTY OF A JUDGE:- Need for a Judge in the due dispensation of Justice, to be above board and an impartial Judge – Need to restrict himself to the evidence before him – whether it is the function of a judge to proffer reasons for the recantation by witnesses, and acting on their recanted evidence |
| LAWAL MOHMMED V. PARTICK O. NWOBODO | COURT:– Proceedings in chambers – whether violates section 33 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1979. |
| LAWRENCE IBANGA UBEH & ANOR V. KUFRE BASSEY ETUK & ORS | COURT – CASE LAW – RATIO DECIDENDI:- How ratio decidendi of a case is determined |
| LAWRENCE OKWUEZE V. EMMANUEL EJIOFOR | COURT:- Contempt proceedings – forms 48 and 49 – purpose of. |
| LAYONU AND OTHERS. V. THE STATE | COURT:- Trial Judge – Sentencing proceeding for capital offences – Where judge seek to recommend that the capital sentences which the law required him to pass should be commuted to terms of Imprisonment – Need to communicate same confidentially in all cases |
| LH. MOHAMMED MOHAMMED V. MARTINS ELECTRONICS COMPANY LTD | COURT – JURISDICTION OF THE COURT OF APPEAL:- Who is competent to invoke the jurisdiction of the court of appeal |
| LIMAN V. MOHAMMED | COURT:- Court of law as court of equity – Concept of – Limit and scope of COURT:- Duty on court not to formulate cases for parties. COURT:- High Court of Kano State-Jurisdiction of to award damages in lieu of specific performance – Origin of. COURT:- Reliefs – Relief not claimed – Grant of by court – Whether discretionary. |
| LIMOTA MOLADUN V. BADERINWA AJIKE | COURT:- Customary Courts—visit to locus in quo—not necessary for all members of native tribunals to be present at the locus. |
| LINGO NIG. LTD. V. NWODO | COURT:-Court of Appeal – conditions for varying the terms of a conditional stay of execution granted by the lower court. |
| LONESSOME OKOI OFEM & ORS. V. PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OF NIGERIA | COURT – ABUSE OF COURT PROCESS:- What an abuse of court process entails |
| LORD SAMUEL AKHIDIME V. THE STATE | COURT – SUPREME COURT – OMISSION IN RULE OF COURT:- Supreme Court jurisdiction as creation of statute – Inadvertent statutory omission leading to denial of a death row convict an intervention available to parties in civil proceedings – Attitude of court thereto – Order 8 (Supreme Court Rules) dealing with criminal appeals compared with Order 7 rule 2(6) |
| LT COL. A. AKINWALE v NIGERIAN ARMY | COURT:- General Court Martial – Nature of – Integral nature of the Investigative/Sentencing and Confirming processes of a General Court Martial – Necessity of observing strictly the prescribed steps |
| LUKE OKORO & ORS V. HILARY EGBUOH & ORS | COURT – RULES OF COURT:- rule of court on adducing new evidence |
| M A OKUPE AND CO LTD V. SARUMI | COURT – EQUITY:- Attitude of courts to fraudulent contracts – Parties in pari delicto – |
| M. T. MAMMAN V. A. A.SALAUDEEN | COURT-Academic questions-Attitude of court thereto. COURT-Exercise of discretion by lower court-Attitude of appellate court thereto – When will not interfere therewith. COURT- Findings off act by trial court-Attitude of appellate court thereto. |
| M.A. ENIGBOKAN V. AMERICAN INTERNATIONAL INSURANCE CO. (NIG.) LTD. | COURT – Reliefs – Reliefs claimed 117 writ of summons – Where not claimed in statement of claim – Effect and treatment of. COURT – Relief’s- Reliefs not sought – Court not to grant. |
| M.C. OKANUME V. U.A.C. NIG. PLC. | COURT:– Discretionary power of court under the undefended list procedure – when such could be challenged on appeal. |
| M.O.KANU LTD V. FIRST BANK OF NIGERIA PLC | COURT – Supreme Court -Attitude to concurrent findings of fact. |
| M.V DA QING SHAN V. ASSAN OIL MILLS LIMITED | COURT – Duty on court to refrain from deciding abstract questions of law. COURT – Judgment of court – Correct conclusions reached therein – Whether vitiated by wrong reasoning. |
| MAAJI GALADIMA V. ALHAJI ADAMU TAMBAI & ORS | COURT – JURISDICTION:- Whether the issue of jurisdiction is one of the prerequisites of court in the exercise of its jurisdiction |
| MABERA V. OBI AND OTHERS. | COURT – JURISDICTION:- Jurisdiction of High Court – Ouster of – Sale of property – Recovery of possession – Section 17(1) (a) High Court Laws of Northern States, S.41(3) (a) and (c) Land Tenure Law Cap. 59 – Area Courts Edict (North Western State) 1967 S.2 (2) , S.19(3) and First Schedule, Pan 2; Area Courts (Limitation of Powers) Order, 1968, S.2. – How treated |
| MACAULAY V. RAIFFEISEN ZENTRAL BANK OSTERREICH | COURT-Supreme Court- Attitude of Supreme Court to an academic exercise. |
| MACKAM V. THE QUEEN | COURT:- Evidence – Duty of Judge towards evidence elicited at preliminary depositions not put in evidence before the court- Whether proper to refer to same in judgment – Effect |
| MADAM ABUSATU AGBOGUNLERI V. MR. JOHN DEPO & ORS | COURT:- Decision of Court:- When said to be final – Need to for it to finally dispose of the rights of the parties – Legal implications COURT:- Interlocutory decisions – When deemed to be final decisions – Relevant considerations |
| MADAM FUMIKE OJO-OSAGIE V. SUNDAY ADONRI | COURT- Findings cal fact by trial court-Attitude of appellate court thereto – When it will interfere therewith. COURT – Issue before the court – Duty on court to restrict itself thereto – Where Court raises issue suo motu – What it should do. COURT – Raising issue suo motu – Court deciding issues so raised without hearing the Pat ties – Effect thereof. |
| MAFYAI KODEN V. MESHAK SHIDON | COURT:-Appeal from Customary Court of Appeal of a State to the Court of appeal – Requirement for competency of – Application of section 224 (1) of the 1979 Constitution – Need for ground of appeal to raise issue of customary law. |
| MAIKORI V. LERE | COURT:‑ Election petition ‑ Hearing and determination of election petition ‑ Time limit therefor ‑ Need to give adequate time. |
| MALLAM ABUBAKAR ABUBAKAR & ORS. V. SAIDU USMAN NASAMU & ORS. | COURT – DECISION OF COURT:- When a decision of court can be said to have been arrived at especially in an election petition |
| MALLAM IDRISU GULMA V. AHMADU BAHAGO | COURT:- Sharia Court of appeal; -Jurisdiction to deal with Islamic personal law |
| MALLAM SAIDU AMORI V. YAKUBU IYANDA | COURT – DISCRETIONARY JURISDICTION:- Whether a court has discretionary jurisdiction to examine the entire circumstances of a case |
| MALLAM UBA ABDULKADIR V. MALLAM RABIUMUSA | COURT:- Jurisdiction of court – What determines COURT:- Sharia Court of Appeal – Jurisdiction of Source of-Extent of |
| MAMMAN V. GWANDU N. A. | COURT:- Judgment of Native Court not signed – Whether S.245 Criminal Procedure Ordinance applies. COURT:- Presumption of regularity of proceeding – When raised – How treated |
| MANGUT MASHINGIL & ORS V. CHIEF JETHRO M. AKUN & ORS | COURT – RULES OF COURT:- Nature of as subsidiary legislations by virtue of section 18(1) of the interpretation Act and therefore have the force of law – Law that Rules of court are meant to be obeyed – Where the rules provide the mode of commencement of action – Duty of the plaintiff to scrupulously comply with the procedure laid down so as to fully endow the court the right to assume jurisdiction and adjudicate on the matter |
| MANHATTAN INVESTMENT LIMITED V. CO-OPERATIVE DEVELOPMENT BANK PLC | COURT – DISCRETION OF COURT:- Whether the grant or refusal a stay of execution of judgment pending appeal is at the discretion of court |
| MARGARET AKUNG EPHRAIM NENE EYU (MRS) V. THE STATE | COURT:- Lack of jurisdiction – Proceedings therein and order of – Effect |
| MARTIN AGBASO V. IKEDI OHAKIM & ORS. | COURT – FUNCTUS OFFICIO:- Instance where the Court does not become functus officio |
| MATARI V. DANGALADIMA | COURT:- Area Courts – Jurisdiction of – Source of – How ascertained. COURT:- Jurisdiction of court – Importance of to adjudication – Effect of lack of jurisdiction in proceedings and decision of court based thereon. COURT:- Jurisdiction of court to adjudicate -Prerequisites therefor- Absence of – Effect. |
| MATHEW OMONIYI IDOWU V. IDOWU SANUSI OLORUNFEMI & ORS | COURT – CONTEMPT OF COURT:- Criminal contempt of Court – Standard of proof – Whether beyond reasonable doubt |
| MATTHEW OKECHUKWU ENEKWE V. INTERNATIONAL MERCHANT BANK OF NIGERIA LTD. & ORS. | COURT – RAISING ISSUES SUO MOTU:- Whether in the use of words, a court accused of raising issue suo motu. |
| MATTHEW OYE OLUWOLE V. POWER HOLDING COMPANY OF NIGERIA PLC | COURT – JURISDICTION:- Nature and relevance to any judicial adjudication – Whether an issue of jurisdiction can be raised suo motu by a court without the necessity of inviting parties to address the court on it – COURT:- Questions of fact and Questions of Jurisdiction/Law – Distinction when raised suo motu by court – Need for court to invite parties to address it on any issue of fact raised suo motu – Power of court in some special circumstances, to raise an issue of law or jurisdiction suo motu and without hearing the parties decide upon it |
| MAURICE DUMBO & ORS V. CHIEF STEPHEN IDUGBOE | COURT – Duty of a trial judge in libel cases:- Duty of a trial judge in interpreting words as to convey defamatory meaning |
| MBACHU V. ANAMBRA-IMO RIVER BASIN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OWERRI | COURT – Sentiments – Relevance of to adjudication -Attitude of court thereto. |
| MBANI V. BOSI | SUPREME COURT – FINDINGS OF FACT:- Whether the Supreme Court will not interfere with the concurrent findings of fact made by the trial Court and the Court of Appeal unless such findings are perverse or are not supported by the evidence or are reached as a result of a wrong application of evidence of any principle of substantive law or procedure |
| MBEREKPE V. ADIKES | COURT – Case stated to High Court -High Court making consequential order – Voidity of – Sections 31 and 32 Magistrates’ Courts Law Eastern Nigeria. COURT – Case stated to High Court – Law not making provision for procedure the High Court will adopt – What Court to do in the circumstances – Sections 31 and 32 Magistrates’ Courts Law Eastern Nigeria. |
| MECKLERMEDIA CORP AND ANOTHER V. D C CONGRESS GMBH | |
| MEIAUDU YUNANA ZURU V. CHIEF OF NAVAL STAFF AND ORS | COURT – Trial court – duty of same not to bridge the yawning gap in the case of the prosecution. COURT MARTIAL – Convening order in a Court Martial – essence of. COURT MARTIAL – Oath taking or affirmation by member of the Court Martial – whether it is a mandatory statutory provision. |
| MENAKAYA V. MENAKAYA | COURT:- Competence of a court or of the proceedings in court – Whether a fundamental issue which cannot be waived even if the reason for seeking the waiver is based on the argument that it is in the interest of substantial justice – Whether once the incompetence is established, the consent of the parties cannot validate what took place under it and preclude the inevitable result of nullity – Whether waiver cannot be successfully raised in connection with a person discharging a public duty which the law prescribes shall be done in a particular manner but he adopts another inconsistent with the relevant statutory provisions |
| MERCEDES-BENZ AG V. LEIDUCK | |
| MERCHANT BANK OF AFRICA V. OWONIBOYS TECHNICAL SERVICE LIMITED | COMPETENCE OF COURT |
| METAL CONSTRUCTION (W.A) LTD & ORS V. MRS. D.A. MIGLIORE & ANOR | COURT – POWER OF COURT:- Power of the Court of Appeal to amend record of the Trial Court so as to comply with the facts proved before that court and decision given by it – Justification |
| MICHAEL IGBINEDION V. FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA | COURT – ABUSE OF COURT PROCESS:- Meaning of an abuse of court process |
| MICHAEL KAASE AONDOAKAA, SAN V. HON. EMMANUEL BASSEY OBOT & ANOR. | COURT – DISCRETION OF COURT:- When can the exercise of discretion by a Court be said to be judiciously exercised in an appeal |
| MICHAEL ODUNZE V. NWOLU NWOSU (SC) | COURT:- Customary court – Decision of – Appeal therefrom Appellate court determining same – Duty thereon – How discharged. COURT:- Customary court – Decisions of on matters peculiarly within its knowledge – Attitude of appellate court thereto COURT:- Order of court – Proper order – Where plaintiff fails to prove his case – Proper order court should make. |
| MICHAEL V. MIMA PROJECTS VENTURES LTD | COURT:– Court process – when abused – attitude of court. COURT:- Court process – abuse of – what amounts thereto. |
| MICHAEL YUSUF & ORS V. MR. SAMUEL AFOLABI TOLUHI | COURT:- Judicial Notice:- Whether the court of appeal is bound to take judicial notice of its judgments. |
| MIGLIORE AND OTHERS. V. METAL CONSTRUCTION (WEST AFRICA) LIMITED | COURT:- Exercise of discretion –Applicable principle -Setting aside decision – What it involves – Application to set aside – delay – Effect. |
| MIKE AMADI V. FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA | COURT – JURISDICTION:- Conditions requisite to vest a court with jurisdiction to try a case |
| MILITARY ADMINISTRATOR, KWARA STATE V. LAFIAGI | COURTS:- Federal High Court – Status of COURT:- Power of Court of Appeal to transfer case to State High Court when Federal High Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain same. |
| MILTON P. OHWOVORIOLE V. FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA AND ORS. | COURT:- Academic issue – Attitude of the Supreme Court thereto. |
| MISS HELEN EGBUCHE V. MR. PATRICK OKECHUKWU EGBUCHE | COURT:- Trial court – Whether can review its decision own refusing the application of a party to amend his pleadings – Whether decisions must be based on evaluation of the evidence on the point – Purpose of evaluation of evidence – Duty to consider every issue raised before it – How discretion must be exercised |
| MOBIL OIL NIGERIA LIMITED V. NABSONS LMITED | COURT:- Adjournments – Relevant considerations for grant or refusal of. COURT:- Case before the court- Need fn court to limit itself thereto. |
| MOBIL OIL NIGERIA PLC V. ALHAJI F.O. YUSUF | COURT – DISCRETIONARY POWER OF COURT:- Whether or not the court possesses the discretionary power to grant an amendment to correct an irregularity in the process filed |
| JUDGMENTS OF NIGERIAN COURTS | |
| By Substantive Areas | By Litigation/Procedure Areas |
JUDGMENTS BY AREAS OF PRACTICE
JUDGMENTS BY PRACTICE/PROCEDURE ISSUES
