ACCIDENTS - Dangerous driving - Death - Proof - From evidence adduced by PW2 and the medical report - Cause of death could be inferred to be due to the accident (H4) Adeyemo v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1591; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1485) 311

 

ACCIDENTS - Dangerous driving - Federal highway - Proof - The accident occurred along a road - Which was taken judicial notice of by both lower courts - As federal highway (H5) Adeyemo v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1591; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1485) 311

 

ACCIDENTS - Dangerous driving - Ingredients - Proof - Prosecution must prove that manner of driving was reckless - That the dangerous driving caused death - And that accident occurred on federal highway (H3) Adeyemo v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1591; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1485) 311

 

ACCIDENTS - Dangerous driving - Proof - Exhibit C was prima facie evidence of dangerous driving - And a sufficient circumstantial evidence required to sustain a conviction (H1) Adeyemo v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1591; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1485) 311

 

ACCIDENTS - Defence - Challenge - Where the defence is raised - Prosecution must lead credible and admissible evidence - To convince court that the defence does not avail accused (H3) Maiyaki v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2735; (2008) 15 NWLR (Pt.1109) 173

 

ACCIDENTS - Defence of - Condition - The defence does not avail appellant - As he failed to raise the defence timeously (H4) Maiyaki v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2735; (2008) 15 NWLR (Pt.1109) 173

 

ACCIDENTS - Defence of - Weight - Where the defence is successfully set up - Appellant is relieved of criminal responsibility - As there is negation of any deliberate act on his part (H2) Maiyaki v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2735; (2008) 15 NWLR (Pt.1109) 173

 

ACCIDENTS - Proof - Witnesses - Appellant was at liberty to call any of the surviving passengers - As witness to support his case - And should not dictate to prosecution how to carry out its job (H2) Adeyemo v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1591; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1485) 311

 

ACTIONS - Appeals - Consistency of - Appeal being a continuation of the original claim - CA rightly resolved issues that emanated from claim in the trial court (H13) Kayih v. Yilbuk (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 625; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 26

 

ACTIONS - Appeals - Right - Limit - No right including right of appeal is absolute - As preaction action is a condition for exercise of right to bring action - And not an abridgment of that right (H4) Yaki v. Bagudu (2015) 11 KLR (pt. 374) 3503; (2015) 18 NWLR (Pt.1491) 288

 

ACTIONS - Chieftaincy matters - Limitation - Okere v. Amadi - By virtue of this decision of SC - No constitutional provision voids limitation period in chieftaincy matters (H7) Ibrahim v. Lawal (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 1949; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 490

 

ACTIONS - Civil matters - Proof - Standard of - Such matters are decided on balance of probabilities - Hence trial Area Court rightly found that evidence of respondents outweighed that of appellant (H3) Sakati v. Bako (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2085; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1480) 531

 

ACTIONS - Commencement - Abuse of process - Appellant’s fresh action in Bayelsa State on same subject matter as the one pending in Abuja - Is vexatious and abuse of process (H6) Lokpobiri v. Ogola (2015) 11 KLR (pt. 374) 3461; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 328

 

ACTIONS - Commencement - Limitation - Public Officers Protection Act - The plea can be raised by any of the respondents - And a successful defence under the Act ousts jurisdiction of court (H1) Sylva v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1067; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1486) 576

 

ACTIONS - Commencement - Originating summons is used where special statutory provisions exist for its application - And not for proceedings where facts are in dispute (H1) Adeyelu II v. Oyewunmi (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2689

 

ACTIONS - Commencement - Statute bar - By virtue of P.O.P. Law s. 2 - Respondent’s action is not statute barred - Since it was filed within three months after his cause of action arose (H6) CBN v. Okojie (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2149; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1479) 231

 

ACTIONS - Commencement - Wrongful procedure - The claim not being for debt or liquidated money demand - Disqualified the case from being heard under the undefended list procedure (H1) Gambo v. Ikechukwu (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2869; (2011) 17 NWLR (Pt.1277) 561

 

ACTIONS - Consolidation of - Conditions - Are inter alia that the suits must be pending in same court - And the right to relief claimed in each action - Arose out of the same transaction (H1) Ngere v. Okuruket ‘XIV’ (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2215; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1482) 392

 

ACTIONS - Consolidation of - Purpose of - Consolidation is made for expediency and convenience - But where it will result to confusion - Consolidation will not be ordered (H2) Ngere v. Okuruket ‘XIV’ (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2215; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1482) 392

 

ACTIONS - Contracts - Jurisdiction - As the action is on simple contract - FHC cannot arrogate itself jurisdiction - Hence CA wrongfully held that trial court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the action (H4) Wema Securities & Finance Plc. v. Nig. Agric. Insu. Corp. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2557; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 93

 

ACTIONS - Courts - Customary courts - To ascertain capacity in which a party initiates action in the court - The whole proceedings must be looked into - And broad interpretation placed on the judgment (H2) Jitte v. Okpulor (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3649; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1497) 542

 

ACTIONS - Courts - Parties - Joinder of - Is ordered where the party is aggrieved - To avoid multiplicity of suits - Completely deal with the suit - Ensure fair hearing and to avoid loss of jurisdiction (H4) Akpamgbo-Okadigbo v. Chidi (1) (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 953; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 124

 

ACTIONS - Crime - Allegation of - Proof - Evidence Act s. 135(1) - Allegation of fraud and conspiracy on which 1st appellant based his case - Has to be proved beyond reasonable doubt (H2) ACN v. INEC (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3031; (2013) 13 NWLR (Pt.1370) 161

 

ACTIONS - Damages - Award - Basis - Amount of damages awarded by trial court - Is based on evidence before the court - And where there is no evidence in support - The claim would be dismissed (H10) CBN v. Okojie (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2149; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1479) 231

 

ACTIONS - Determination - Basis - A case is decided on credible evidence led in trial court - And where no evidence is led - Nothing much can be achieved on appeal (H13) CBN v. Okojie (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2149; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1479) 231

 

ACTIONS - Determination - Basis - Cases are decided on their peculiar facts - And in the light of the applicable law - As every case is an authority for the facts which it decides (H2) Dankwambo v. Abubakar (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3237; (2016) 2 NWLR (Pt.1495) 157

 

ACTIONS - Elections - Action - Mandatory injunction - 1st to 5th respondents’ quest for the injunction in respect of election matter - Filed at HC instead of election tribunal - Is not maintainable in law (H3) Akpamgbo-Okadigbo v. Chidi (2) (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 759; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 124

 

ACTIONS - Elections - LG chairmen - Expired tenure - Since tenure of appellants have been spent - There cannot be any benefit accruing to them - As the res had finished and became extinct (H3) Ogbolosingha v. Bayelsa S.I.E.C. (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 461; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1455) 311

 

ACTIONS - Elections - Locus standi - Only a participant in primaries can complain of the outcome - But as appellant did not participate in the rerun primaries - He has no locus standi to institute the suit (H5) Daniel v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 809; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1463) 113

 

ACTIONS - Elections - Preelection matter - Time frame - Electoral Act s. 89(9) neither set time within which to conclude the matter - Nor when to commence same (H3) Nobis-Elendu v. INEC (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 1981; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1485) 197

 

ACTIONS - Elections - Primaries - Relief - The injunctive relief sought against 2nd respondent cannot be made - As 1st respondent can no longer submit appellants’ name as the party’s candidate (H3) Ugwu v. PDP (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 731; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1459) 478

 

ACTIONS - Elections - Time - Sui generis - Time is of essence in election matters - Hence the delay of more than 3 months to raise appellant’s complaint - Made the matter a post election one to be determined at the Tribunal (H5) James v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 863; (2015) 12 NWLR (Pt.1474) 538

 

ACTIONS - Fair hearing - Public Officers Protection Act - Defence - A person cannot be said to have been given fair hearing - If he is not allowed to rely on the provisions of an Act of parliament as defence (H2) Sylva v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1067; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1486) 576

 

ACTIONS - Fundamental rights - Enforcement - Jurisdiction - Right of action accrued to respondent to seek redress in FHC - Over malicious prosecution by appellants’ police officers (H1) CBN v. Okojie (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2149; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1479) 231

 

ACTIONS - Injunction - Academic issue - Injunction is granted to restrain a threatened wrong to a right - But cannot be granted in the circumstance - As what is urged to be preserved no longer exist (H8) Odom v. PDP (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 677; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1456) 527

 

ACTIONS - Jurisdiction - Striking out - Where court has no jurisdiction to determine a case - It has no jurisdiction to dismiss it - It should strike out the matter (H3) Sylva v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1067; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1486) 576

 

ACTIONS - Legislations - Amendment - Applicable law - Where cause of action accrued prior to alteration of law governing same - Applicable law is the one in force at the time the cause of action accrued (H2) SPDC Nig. Ltd. v. Anaro (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2281; (2015) 12 NWLR (Pt.1472) 122

 

ACTIONS - Limitation - Determination - Basis - Writ of summons and statement of claim are to be considered - To see when the wrong was committed (H2) Ibrahim v. Lawal (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 1949; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 490

 

ACTIONS - Limitation - Public officers - Where actions are brought against them - The same must be filed within 3 months - After accrual of cause of action - Otherwise the right is unenforceable (H4) CBN v. Okojie (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2149; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1479) 231

 

ACTIONS - Limitation - Public Officers Protection Act - Application - For s. 2 of the Act to avail a party - It must be shown that defendant is public officer - Who acted in pursuance of public duty (H3) Ibrahim v. Lawal (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 1949; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 490

 

ACTIONS - Limitation - Public Officers’ Protection Act - Where a law prescribes a period for instituting action - Proceedings cannot be instituted after that period (H1) Ibrahim v. Lawal (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 1949; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 490

 

ACTIONS - Lis pendens - Doctrine of - It prevents the transfer of right or taking of steps - Capable of foisting a state of helplessness on parties or court - During the pendency of an action in court (H2) Wambai v. Donatus (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3163; (2014) 14 NWLR (Pt.1427) 223

 

ACTIONS - Parties - Joinder of - Application for - Delay - Applicants seeking to be joined in the suit between the two sets of respondents - Ought to have promptly joined the action at trial court (H3) Yar’adua v. CPC (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2989

 

ACTIONS - Public officers - Liability of - They are protected if they act in good faith in dispensation of their duties - But would be afforded no protection for acts that amount to abuse of office (H5) CBN v. Okojie (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2149; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1479) 231

 

ACTIONS - Public officers - Limitation law - Effect - Subject to the exception provided in P.O.P Act s. 2(a) - The law extinguishes cause of action - If it is commenced after the stipulated period of three months (H2) INEC v. Ogbadibo L. G. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2399; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1498) 167

 

ACTIONS - Reliefs - Appeals - Purpose of - It is to find out whether on the state of pleadings, evidence and applicable law - The lower court came to right decision - In relation to reliefs canvassed in the matter (H1) Odom v. PDP (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 677; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1456) 527

 

ACTIONS - Reliefs - Land law - Title - Declaratory relief - Will not be conferred on appellants simply upon their pleadings - As there is no evidence tracing their history to their original ancestors (H3) Addah v. Ubandawaki (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 183; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1458) 325

 

ACTIONS - Res judicata - Judgment - Issue - Authenticity of the certificate having been settled to finality in the earlier case - Appellant is estopped from raising the issue in any other case (H7) APC v. PDP (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1179; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1481) 1

 

ACTIONS - Statute bar - Suit of 1st to 4th respondents at trial court was statute barred - And had robbed the court of jurisdiction to entertain the matter (H8) Ibrahim v. Lawal (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 1949; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 490

 

ACTIONS - Striking out - Effect - Miscarriage of justice is not occasioned - Since an order striking out the suit for non justiciability of subject matter - Has the same effect as dismissing the suit (H1) Ugwu v. PDP (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 731; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1459) 478

 

ACTIONS - Striking out - Effect - Once a matter is struck out by a court - The court lacks jurisdiction to make any subsequent order on it (H13) S.P.D.C. Nig. Ltd. v. Agbara (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3707; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1496) 353

 

ADJOURNMENTS - Application - Hearing & ruling - Every of such application whether in writing or orally - Must be heard on the merits - And decided upon before proceeding further with the case (H1) Abah v. Monday (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1569; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1480) 569

 

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW - Appeals - Notice of - Filing fees - Miscalculation of - Mistake made by the court registry officials in assessing the fees - Cannot be visited on appellant (H8) S.P.D.C. Nig. Ltd. v. Agbara (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3707; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1496) 353

 

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW - Commission of Inquiry - Function - Limit - The Commission of Inquiry appointed under s. 2(1) with terms of reference - Does not interfere with jurisdiction of High Court (H3) Kabirikim v. Emefor (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2907; (2009) 14 NWLR (Pt.1162) 602

 

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW - Election petitions - Composition - Consultation with the State CJ and President CCA by PCA - Is not precondition for constituting tribunal - Rather it is aimed at getting eligible members (H3) Nyesom v. Peterside (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3361; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1492) 71

 

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW - Election petitions - Tribunal - Relocation of - In view of security challenges in the State - PCA rightly applied doctrine of necessity - To relocate the Tribunal from the State to Abuja (H6) Nyesom v. Peterside (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3361; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1492) 71

 

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW - Governor - Powers of - Powers conferred on Governor by Commission of Inquiry Law s. 2(1) is wide - Hence to apply ejusdem generis rule to the section - Is to restrict the Governor’s powers (H2) Kabirikim v. Emefor (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2907; (2009) 14 NWLR (Pt.1162) 602

 

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW - Land law - Certificate of Occupancy - Wrongful issuance of - Effect - Where issued as a result of inadvertence on part of official concerned - It cannot be said to be false and fraudulent (H2) Yakubu v. Jauroyel (2015) 11 KLR (pt. 374) 3547; (2014) 11 NWLR (Pt.1418) 205

 

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW - Tribunals - Impeachment panel - Finding - Ekiti State HA violated 1999 Constitution s. 188(8) by setting up second panel - Hence proceedings conducted by the panel was exercise in futility (H5) APC v. PDP (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1179; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1481) 1

 

ADMIRALTY - Jurisdiction - Prior to promulgation of Decree no. 59 of 1991 - State HC can by virtue of unlimited jurisdiction conferred on it by Constitution 1979 - Exercise concurrent jurisdiction in respect of matters under FHC Act s. 7 (H1) SPDC Nig. Ltd. v. Anaro (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2281; (2015) 12 NWLR (Pt.1472) 122

 

AFFIDAVITS - Appeals - Extension of time - Conditions - For exercise of court’s discretion - Applicant must disclose in the supporting affidavit - Good and substantial reason for delay - And an arguable ground (H1) Lafferi Nig. Ltd. v. Nal Merchant Bank Plc. (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1459; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1478) 64

 

AFFIDAVITS - Appeals - Extension of time - Reasons - From totality of the affidavit evidence including documents exhibited - Applicant has provided good and substantial reasons - For delay to appeal within prescribed period (H1) Amaechi v. Omehia (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3069; (2013) 16 NWLR (Pt.1381) 417

 

AFFIDAVITS - Appeals - Preliminary objection - Basis - Under SC Rules 1999 preliminary objection is not restricted to grounds of law or facts - And even if affidavit is struck out - Grounds for the objection is intact (H2) PPA v. INEC (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2941; (2012) 13 NWLR (Pt.1317) 215

 

AFFIDAVITS - Jurisdiction - Determination - Basis - In suits fought on pleadings - Objection is resolved by examining plaintiff’s claim - And in originating motion - Affidavit in support is considered (H1) Akpamgbo-Okadigbo v. Chidi (2) (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 759; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 124

 

AFFIDAVITS - Jurisdiction - Determination - Basis - It is plaintiff’s claim that would be considered - And where suit is commenced by originating summons - Averments in affidavit are considered (H2) James v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 863; (2015) 12 NWLR (Pt.1474) 538

 

AFFIDAVITS - Jurisdiction - Determination of - Basis - Where the objection is raised by motion supported by affidavit - The affidavit evidence and facts deposed to in opposition must be considered (H2) Roda v. FRN (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 121; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1468) 427

 

AFFIDAVITS - Undefended suits - Defence - Affidavit in support - Of notice of intention to defend must disclose facts - Which throw some doubt on plaintiff’s case (H8) Wema Securities & Finance Plc. v. Nig. Agric. Insu. Corp. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2557; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 93

 

AFFIDAVITS - Undefended suits - Defendant must file notice of intention to defend the suit and affidavit in support - And once triable issue is disclosed - Suit is transferred to general list (H2) Ifeanyichukwu Trad. Invest. Ven. Ltd. v. Onyesom Comm. Bank (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2183; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1487) 1

 

AFFIDAVITS - Undefended suits - Notice of defence - Failure to file - Once defendant fails to deliver the notice and affidavit in support - Plaintiff is entitled to judgment (H3) Ifeanyichukwu Trad. Invest. Ven. Ltd. v. Onyesom Comm. Bank (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2183; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1487) 1

 

AGENCY - Criminal procedure - Institution of - Powers of A-G Federation - The offences being federal indictment - The A-G may by himself or through an agent - Prosecute the offences alleged (H3) Dariye v. FRN (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 529; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1467) 325

 

AGREEMENTS - Contracts - Privity of - Only parties to a contract can enforce it - Third party to a contract cannot do so - Even if the contract was made for his benefit (H1) Rebold Ind. Ltd. v. Magreola (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1349; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1461) 210

 

AGREEMENTS - Land law - Sale - Agreement ­- The exhibits and respondent’s testimony on oath - Confirm that there is an agreement to sell the land - And further agreement that payment shall be by installments (H3) Ogundalu v. Macjob (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1021; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1460) 96

 

ALIBI - Defence - Conditions - For the defence to avail an accused - Such must be raised at the earliest opportunity - And with sufficient particulars to enable the police investigate it (H5) Mohammed v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 439

 

ALIBI - Defence - Conditions - For the defence to be entertained - It must be raised at earliest time - With sufficient particulars given of accused whereabouts - So as to enable police verify the claim (H10) Sale v. State (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3679; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 392

 

ALIBI - Defence - Failure to investigate - Failure of police to investigate the truth or otherwise of appellant’s alibi - Has cast doubt on prosecution’s case (H12) Sale v. State (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3679; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 392

 

ALIBI - Defence - Investigation - Prosecution must not investigate every alibi - But where accused story is capable of providing a defence - There is duty on prosecution to carry out investigation (H11) Sale v. State (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3679; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 392

 

ALIBI - Investigation - Failure of the police to investigate the defence - As properly raised by appellant - Created serious lapse in the conduct of prosecuting the case (H3) Sani v. State (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2115; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1483) 522

 

ALIBI - Investigation of - Alibi must be definite as to time and whereabouts of accused - And once timeously raised - It must be thoroughly investigated by the police (H2) Idemudia v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2369; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1488) 375

 

ALIBI - Plea - Conditions - Accused must raise the defence at the earliest opportunity - Giving particulars of his whereabouts and those present with him - Otherwise it will not avail accused (H4) Iliyasu v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 559; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1469) 26

 

ALIBI - Plea - Validity - Appellant’s failure to raise the defence at earliest time nullifies same - As no burden shifted on the police to investigate (H3) Uche v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1731; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1470) 380

 

ALIBI - Proof - Accused is not obliged to prove his alibi - As it is enough if he supplies material facts - Sufficient for police to investigate the defence raised (H4) Idemudia v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2369; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1488) 375

 

APPEALS - Actions - Consistency of - Appeal being a continuation of the original claim - CA rightly resolved issues that emanated from claim in the trial court (H13) Kayih v. Yilbuk (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 625; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 26

 

APPEALS - Actions - Determination - Basis - A case is decided on credible evidence led in trial court - And where no evidence is led - Nothing much can be achieved on appeal (H13) CBN v. Okojie (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2149; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1479) 231

 

APPEALS - Civil appeals - Filing fees - The fees are generally set out by Rules of Court - And paid to registrar of the court from which appeal emanates (H5) S.P.D.C. Nig. Ltd. v. Agbara (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3707; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1496) 353

 

APPEALS - Commencement - It is initiated by filing a Notice of Appeal - Which is the foundation of a proper and valid appeal (H3) S.P.D.C. Nig. Ltd. v. Agbara (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3707; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1496) 353

 

APPEALS - Concurrent findings - Except where there are strong reasons - Supreme Court does not interfere with such decisions of the lower courts (H3) Abirifon v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3021; (2013) 13 NWLR (Pt.1372) 587

 

APPEALS - Concurrent findings - Fair hearing - Lower courts findings that affected appellants’ right to fair hearing are perverse - Thus the decisions cannot persist and are set aside (H6) Akpamgbo-Okadigbo v. Chidi (1) (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 953; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 124

 

APPEALS - Concurrent findings - Interference - As there has been a violation of some principles of law and procedure - Which created a miscarriage of justice - SC can rightly intervene (H3) Zakari v. Nigerian Army (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1533; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1487) 77

 

APPEALS - Concurrent findings - Supreme Court does not interfere with such findings - Unless the findings are perverse - Or there was serious error which resulted in miscarriage of justice (H3) Owhoruke v. COP (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2235; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1483) 557

 

APPEALS - Concurrent findings - The findings of the lower courts arising from due considerations - And without miscarriage of justice - Are not to be interfered with (H2) Aji v. Chad Basin Dev. Auth. (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 937; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1486) 554

 

APPEALS - Consolidation - Allegation of inconvenience - Proof - Respondents failed to establish how they would be confused - If the two appeals are heard and determined together (H3) Ngere v. Okuruket ‘XIV’ (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2215; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1482) 392

 

APPEALS - Conviction - Validity - Appellate court will not set aside conviction made under a repealed law - If at the time there was existing law under which the conviction should have been made (H1) Adonike v. State (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 11; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1458) 237

 

APPEALS - Court - Discretion - CA rightly determined discretion of trial court - And held that the same was improperly exercised - As it caused a miscarriage of justice to respondent (H6) Daniel v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1757; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 119

 

APPEALS - Court - Discretion - Exercise of - Must always be judicial and judicious - Hence discretion based on principle that inadequate filing fees is fatal to appeal - Is a wrong exercise of discretion (H9) S.P.D.C. Nig. Ltd. v. Agbara (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3707; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1496) 353

 

APPEALS - Court - Document - Admissibility of - Where document is unlawfully admitted without objection at trial - Appellant can still object on appeal - Particularly where miscarriage of justice occurred (H5) Unity Life & Fire Insurance Ltd. v. Int’l Bank of W. Africa (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2821; (2001) 7 NWLR (Pt.713) 610

 

APPEALS - Court - Findings - Failure of appellant to raise ground against CA’s reliance on doctrine of necessity - In relocating the Tribunal - Is deemed to be an endorsement of stance of the court (H7) Nyesom v. Peterside (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3361; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1492) 71

 

APPEALS - Court - Findings of fact - Based on demeanour is an exclusive prerogative of trial court - Which appellate courts do not make the habit of interfering with (H6) FRN v. Dairo (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 211; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1454) 141

 

APPEALS - Court martial - Composition of - Objection - Failure to object to membership of an unqualified officer of the court - Does not bar the party to raise same objection bordering on jurisdiction on appeal (H2) Zakari v. Nigerian Army (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1533; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1487) 77

 

APPEALS - Court processes - Misuse of - Order to be made - Where originating summons was used in contentious matter - Appellate court is not to go into the merits - But should strike out the matter (H2) Adeyelu II v. Oyewunmi (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2689

 

APPEALS - Courts - Evidence - Evaluation - Ascription of credibility to evidence of witnesses is within power of trial court - Which appellate courts cannot interfere with (H4) Omisore v. Aregbesola (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1821; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1482) 205

 

APPEALS - Courts - Evidence - Review of - Court reviews a part of evidence complained of through ground of appeal - Properly filed and challenging the evidence (H5) Alo v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 331; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1464) 238

 

APPEALS - Courts - Jurisdiction - Absence of - Once trial court lacks jurisdiction on a matter - Court of Appeal will have no jurisdiction to hear and determine the matter on the merit (H4) Wambai v. Donatus (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3163; (2014) 14 NWLR (Pt.1427) 223

 

APPEALS - Courts - Procedure - Irregularity in - Waiver - Where party at trial consented to a procedure which is merely wrong - It is late to complain against same on appeal - Simply because he lost the case (H6) Unity Life & Fire Insurance Ltd. v. Int’l Bank of W. Africa (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2821; (2001) 7 NWLR (Pt.713) 610

 

APPEALS - Crime - Evidence - Re evaluation - Is only done where trial court erred in evaluating facts - Thereby empowering appellate court to re examine the whole facts - And come to an independent decision (H4) Ali v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1611; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 1

 

APPEALS - Damages - Award - Interference - Appellate court does not interfere with award - Save where trial court acted under a mistake of law - Or the amount awarded is either ridiculously low or high (H5) British Airways v. Atoyebi (2015) 11 KLR (pt. 374) 3425; (2014) 13 NWLR (Pt.1424) 253

 

APPEALS - Damages - Award - Interference - Damages are awarded at the discretion of trial Judge - And appeal court does not interfere unless - The exercise is tainted with irregularity (H11) CBN v. Okojie (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2149; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1479) 231

 

APPEALS - Discretion - Interference - Appellate court will not interfere with discretion of lower court - Simply because if faced with a similar application - It would have exercised discretion differently (H3) Lafferi Nig. Ltd. v. Nal Merchant Bank Plc. (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1459; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1478) 64

 

APPEALS - Dismissal - Legal practitioner - Mistake of - Dismissal of appellant’s appeal based on the inadvertence of his counsel - Is a denial of right to be heard on the merit (H2) Abah v. Monday (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1569; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1480) 569

 

APPEALS - Dismissal - Subsequent order - Validity of - Having earlier dismissed respondents’ appeal - CA became functus officio - And as such its latter order for extension of time - Was made in error (H2) Dakan v. Asalu (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1691; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 47

 

APPEALS - Dismissal - Validity - Respondent’s oral application for dismissal is in order - And court has jurisdiction to strike out or dismiss appeal - Where appellant failed to prosecute same diligently (H4) Abah v. Monday (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1569; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1480) 569

 

APPEALS - Dismissal - Want of diligent prosecution - Appeal dismissed on failure to file appellant’s brief is final - And the court has no jurisdiction to revive it (H1) Dakan v. Asalu (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1691; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 47

 

APPEALS - Document - Filing - Document or process is deemed duly filed when it is taken to court registry - Assessed by officer assigned the responsibility and paid for (H4) Ogwe v. Inspector General Police (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 499; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1459) 505

 

APPEALS - Election - Academic issue - Courts should not spend judicial time on such issue - But since the present appeal is being heard and decided before 29/05/2015 - It is not an academic exercise (H2) Daniel v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 809; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1463) 113

 

APPEALS - Election petition - Time limit - SC cannot invoke SC Act s. 22 to save the appeal - As CA by effluxion of time lacks jurisdiction - To adjudicate on the appeal (H2) CPC v. Yuguda (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2859; (2013) 7 NWLR (Pt.1354) 450

 

APPEALS - Election petitions - Gubernatorial - Final court - Constitution 1999 s. 246 deprives SC of jurisdiction - To deal with gubernatorial election petition - As CA is the final court (H1) Sha’aban v. Sambo (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2975; (2010) 19 NWLR (Pt.1226) 353

 

APPEALS - Election petitions - Hearing - Time limit - The appeal is statute barred by virtue of Constitution 1999 s. 285(7) - Hence Supreme Court has no jurisdiction to entertain it (H3) ACN v. INEC (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3031; (2013) 13 NWLR (Pt.1370) 161

 

APPEALS - Election petitions - Issue - Appeal before CA relates to the petition - As dismissal of the petition by the trial Tribunal - Gave rise to the appeal before Court of Appeal (H5) Dankwambo v. Abubakar (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3237; (2016) 2 NWLR (Pt.1495) 157

 

APPEALS - Election petitions - Validity - Res judicata - As judgment of trial Tribunal is valid and not set aside - Appellant cannot appeal on same subject matter without his political party (H2) Agbaje v. INEC (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3223; (2016) 4 NWLR (Pt.1501) 151

 

APPEALS - Elections - Preelection - SC order - Amendment of - The order made by this court in the earlier appeal is set aside - As SC is not one of the courts regulated by Electoral Act s. 141 (H3) Jev v. Iyortom (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 601; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1483) 484

 

APPEALS - Elections - Relief - Consideration of appellant’s claim in view of his assertion in a primary he never participated in - Is a worthless exercise - Hence the CA decision is unassailable (H3) Daniel v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 809; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1463) 113

 

APPEALS - Evidence - Evaluation - Having lawfully excluded the inadmissible evidence - CA review of evidence due to failure of the trial court in that regard - Cannot be said to be perverse (H6) Odom v. PDP (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 677; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1456) 527

 

APPEALS - Evidence - Evaluation - Interference - Judgment of trial court on matters of credibility is binding - Hence CA was in error when it expunged exhibit AX from the records (H4) FRN v. Borishade (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 81; (2015) 5 NWLR (Pt.1451) 155

 

APPEALS - Evidence - Evaluation - Issue as to whether party proved his claim - Cannot be determined without evaluating evidence - Hence CA rightly proceeded to evaluate the evidence and considered exhibits tendered (H6) Kabirikim v. Emefor (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2907; (2009) 14 NWLR (Pt.1162) 602

 

APPEALS - Extension of time - Conditions - For exercise of court’s discretion - Applicant must disclose in the supporting affidavit - Good and substantial reason for delay - And an arguable ground (H1) Lafferi Nig. Ltd. v. Nal Merchant Bank Plc. (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1459; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1478) 64

 

APPEALS - Extension of time - Reason - Applicant’s delay in filing his notice of appeal - Due to absence of his lead counsel - Cannot be excused - Since another counsel can competently file the notice (H3) Adigwe v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1381; (2015) 18 NWLR (Pt.1490) 105

 

APPEALS - Extension of time - Reasons - Exception - Where ground complains of absence of jurisdiction - Court would no longer consider the reasons adduced for the delay necessary (H4) Adigwe v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1381; (2015) 18 NWLR (Pt.1490) 105

 

APPEALS - Extension of time - Reasons - Exception - Where grounds raise the issue of jurisdiction - Reasons for the delay in appealing within time cease to be relevant (H2) Lafferi Nig. Ltd. v. Nal Merchant Bank Plc. (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1459; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1478) 64

 

APPEALS - Extension of time - Reasons - From totality of the affidavit evidence including documents exhibited - Applicant has provided good and substantial reasons - For delay to appeal within prescribed period (H1) Amaechi v. Omehia (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3069; (2013) 16 NWLR (Pt.1381) 417

 

APPEALS - Filing - Payment of fees - Where inadequate fees are paid - Court can order for the short fall to be paid - As the omission does not rob the court of its jurisdiction (H5) Ogwe v. Inspector General Police (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 499; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1459) 505

 

APPEALS - Filing fees - Inadequacy of - Remedy - Where there is insufficient filing fee on document placed before the registry - Court should direct that such shortfall be remedied (H11) S.P.D.C. Nig. Ltd. v. Agbara (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3707; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1496) 353

 

APPEALS - Finding - Failure to appeal - As there is no further appeal to SC against the order made by CA - Dismissing appellant’s cross appeal - The finding is binding on all the parties (H7) Kayih v. Yilbuk (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 625; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 26

 

APPEALS - Findings - Failure to appeal - Appellant who did not appeal against the finding by CA - Cannot be heard to complain that - The court did not take decision on issue of discretion (H5) Daniel v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1757; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 119

 

APPEALS - Foreign trip - Notice of appeal - Filing - Applicant relying on absence due to foreign trip - Should inter alia show that he owns a valid passport - And a visa admitting him to the country of visit (H1) Adigwe v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1381; (2015) 18 NWLR (Pt.1490) 105

 

APPEALS - Fresh issue - Leave - Fresh issue of impersonation introduced without compliance with the rules - Was properly struck out by the tribunal and rightly affirmed by CA (H8) APC v. PDP (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1179; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1481) 1

 

APPEALS - Fresh issue - Leave - Having neither canvassed the relief at CA - Nor sought and obtained leave to raise same in SC - Appellant cannot be heard on the issue (H2) Odom v. PDP (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 677; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1456) 527

 

APPEALS - Fresh issue - Leave - Issue of whether the narcotic drug comes within meaning of NDLEA Act s. 11(c)(d) was not before CA - And cannot be raised in SC for the first time without leave (H2) Blessing v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1653; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 1

 

APPEALS - Fresh issue - Leave - Substantial issue not raised in lower court - Is not allowed to be raised for the first time in Supreme Court - Except with leave of the court (H6) Ibrahim v. Lawal (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 1949; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 490

 

APPEALS - Fresh issue - Party raising an issue for the first time must do so by leave of court - Save where the issue is on jurisdiction - Which is the foundation of adjudication (H4) Sakati v. Bako (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2085; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1480) 531

 

APPEALS - Fresh issues - Leave - Issues not considered and pronounced on by trial court - Are fresh issues that can only be heard by appellate court - After leave of the court is obtained (H1) Compagnie Generale De Geopysique Nig. Ltd. v. Aminu (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 793; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1459) 577

 

APPEALS - Ground - Formulation - In the absence of a ground and an issue raised therefrom - Appellant cannot be heard to raise a bare complaint in vacuo (H1) Mbang v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3113; (2013) 7 NWLR (Pt.1352) 48

 

APPEALS - Ground - Issue - Formulation - Obiter dictum - The comment by CA is obiter dictum - Which cannot be the basis for raising ground of appeal - From which an issue can be framed (H3) APC v. PDP (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1179; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1481) 1

 

APPEALS - Ground - Leave - Appellants do not require leave to raise a ground - That the CA granted the injunction it did - When issue of jurisdiction has not been settled - As this is a question of law (H1) Soludo v. Osigbo (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2983; (2009) 18 NWLR (Pt.1173) 290

 

APPEALS - Grounds - CA Rules - Adherence to - Appellants having not been misled by content of the 1st & 2nd grounds - There has been substantial compliance with O. 6 r. 2(2)(3) of the Rules (H5) Akpamgbo-Okadigbo v. Chidi (2) (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 759; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 124

 

APPEALS - Grounds - Competence - Where there are incompetent and competent grounds in notice of appeal - The former would be struck out - While the latter would sustain the appeal (H2) Abubakar v. Ibrahim (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3199

 

APPEALS - Grounds - Competence of - By virtue of Constitution 1999 s. 233(2)(a) - Appeal will lie as of right to SC on ground 7 - Which questions the jurisdiction of CA to determine the suit (H3) Iragbiji v. Oyewole (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3099; (2013) 13 NWLR (Pt.1372) 566

 

APPEALS - Grounds - Determination - Where ground raises issue of law based on admitted facts - It is ground of law - But where it is based on facts in dispute - It is one of mixed law and facts (H1) Briggs v. Chief Lands Officer Rivers State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2703; (2005) 12 NWLR (Pt.938) 59

 

APPEALS - Grounds - Leave - Where leave is a precondition before filing notice of appeal - Containing grounds of mixed law and facts - Appellant who files a notice without leave - Will have his process thrown out (H1) Abubakar v. Ibrahim (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3199

 

APPEALS - Grounds - Particulars - Defect - Courts are encouraged to make the best they can out of a bad ground - Hence defects in particulars would not necessarily render the ground incompetent (H2) Omisore v. Aregbesola (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1821; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1482) 205

 

APPEALS - Hearing notice - Fair hearing - CA rightly proceeded with the matter - Having established that appellant was duly served but chose to be absent - Hence he cannot complain of breach of fair hearing (H1) Ogwe v. Inspector General Police (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 499; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1459) 505

 

APPEALS - Interested party - Leave - Failure to obtain - Appellants being interested parties ought to seek leave to appeal - And having failed to do so - CA rightly struck out the appeal as incompetent (H4) Assams v. Ararume (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3629; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1493) 368

 

APPEALS - Interference - Evidence - Crime - Evaluation - Correctness of - Evaluation of the trial Judge is unassailable as there is nothing to show perversity - Hence Supreme Court will not interfere (H4) Busari v. State (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 53; (2015) 5 NWLR (Pt.1452) 343

 

APPEALS - Issue - Determination - Appellant’s issue 1 on lack of jurisdiction of trial Tribunal - Is enough to dispose off the appeal (H4) MPPP v. INEC (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3335

 

APPEALS - Issue - Formulation by court - Appellant’s issue 1 and the issue 2 formulated by Court of Appeal are the same - The court simply added some words to state the obvious (H5) Kabirikim v. Emefor (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2907; (2009) 14 NWLR (Pt.1162) 602

 

APPEALS - Issue - Suo motu raising - By virtue of CA Act s. 15 - The court has jurisdiction to suo motu raise any issue - And determine same after hearing parties (H1) Nobis-Elendu v. INEC (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 1981; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1485) 197

 

APPEALS - Issues - Determination of - There is no doubt that from the records - CA dealt with the complaint of appellant - Hence it pronounced on all issues raised (H4) FRN v. Dairo (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 211; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1454) 141

 

APPEALS - Issues - Formulation - Basis - Issues must be formulated from grounds - Which in turn must derive from the ratio decidendi of judgment appealed against (H6) James v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 863; (2015) 12 NWLR (Pt.1474) 538

 

APPEALS - Issues - Raising of - Where court advances reasons for not dealing with an issue - An aggrieved person can raise any or all the reasons given by the court - As an issue on appeal (H5) Sakati v. Bako (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2085; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1480) 531

 

APPEALS - Judgment - Issue - Bordering on defect in the notice of appeal was settled to finality - And the only option open to a dissatisfied party - Is to appeal against it (H2) Michael v. Bank of the North (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1711; (2015) 12 NWLR (Pt.1473) 370

 

APPEALS - Judgment - Mistake - Weight - It is not every error in judgment that results in appeal being allowed - As it is only substantial error that occasioned miscarriage of justice - That warrants interference on appeal (H2) Compagnie Gen. De Geo. Nig. Ltd. v. Idorenyin (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1435; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 149

 

APPEALS - Judicial precedent - Upholding of - CA ought to be bound by its previous decision and that of SC - In respect of the issue the appeal raises (H3) Ogwe v. Inspector General Police (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 499; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1459) 505

 

APPEALS - Jurisdiction - Court of Appeal - Jurisdiction of the court to entertain appeals is statutorily derived - And it is equally guided by its Rules (H1) Ikechukwu v. FRN (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 845; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 1

 

APPEALS - Jurisdiction - Fresh issue of - Although a party must seek leave to raise fresh issue - But where issue is on jurisdiction - The same can be raised for the first time on appeal without leave (H2) Wema Securities & Finance Plc. v. Nig. Agric. Insu. Corp. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2557; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 93

 

APPEALS - Jurisdiction - Fresh issue of - Can be raised for the first time in CA or SC - And there is no need to seek leave before raising it on appeal (H2) Compagnie Generale De Geopysique Nig. Ltd. v. Aminu (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 793; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1459) 577

 

APPEALS - Jurisdiction - Fundamentality of - It is a question of law that can be raised as fresh issue on appeal even in SC - And there is no need for leave before it is properly raised (H1) MPPP v. INEC (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3335

 

APPEALS - Jurisdiction - Having struck out appellants’ appeal for being incompetent - CA ceased to have jurisdiction over the matter before it (H5) Ihedioha v. Okorocha (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3287; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1492) 147

 

APPEALS - Jurisdiction - Issue - Time to raise - Challenge to jurisdiction of court can be raised at any stage of the trial - And even on appeal (H2) Omokhafe v. Esekhomo (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2783; (1993) 8 NWLR (Pt.309) 58

 

APPEALS - Jurisdiction - Issues - Although CA has a duty to pronounce on all issues before it - But where the court decides that it lacks jurisdiction - It is unnecessary to consider other issues (H4) Ikechukwu v. FRN (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 845; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 1

 

APPEALS - Land law - Concurrent findings - Interference - The findings of title over the land verged red and blue are wrong - And hereby set aside for being perverse (H7) Ogundalu v. Macjob (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1021; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1460) 96

 

APPEALS - Land law - Court - Findings - As the trial court was constituted by men better placed to appreciate the matter - Its findings that respondent rightly proved his claim cannot be faulted (H3) Jitte v. Okpulor (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3649; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1497) 542

 

APPEALS - Land law - Variation order - CA rightly varied the decision of the trial customary court - Rather than reversing same - For this was done in the general interest of the family (H5) Jitte v. Okpulor (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3649; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1497) 542

 

APPEALS - Leave - Application - Time frame - No period of time is prescribed within which interested party may apply for leave - But when leave is obtained - Appeal must be within time prescribed by CA Act s. 25 (H3) Assams v. Ararume (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3629; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1493) 368

 

APPEALS - Locus standi - Res judicata - Appellant is stopped per rem judicatam - From bringing same case before the court - As he cannot question conduct of election - In which he did not participate (H5) Sylva v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1067; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1486) 576

 

APPEALS - Maritime - Issue - Conditions for application of the doctrine are not available - Since neither the parties nor subject matter of the proceedings in England - Are the same in this appeal (H3) Oleksandr v. Lonestar Drilling Co. Ltd. (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1301; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1464) 337

 

APPEALS - Maritime - Validity of judgment - Conclusion reached by the lower court was based on proper appraisal of evidence - Hence there is no cogent reason to warrant interference (H2) Oleksandr v. Lonestar Drilling Co. Ltd. (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1301; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1464) 337

 

APPEALS - Maritime law - Judgment - As there was no appeal against the finding of trial court - Issue as to who was responsible for appellants’ detention aboard the ship is settled (H1) Oleksandr v. Lonestar Drilling Co. Ltd. (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1301; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1464) 337

 

APPEALS - Murder - Fresh issue - Validity of - Although the issue of absence of appellant is fresh in SC - The court allowed same because of the criminal trial which attracted highest sentence (H3) Mohammad v. State (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 101

 

APPEALS - Notice - Competence of - It is the foundation of every appeal - Hence any defect therein will render the whole appeal incompetent - And appellate court will lack jurisdiction to entertain it (H1) Ikuepenikan v. State (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1273; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1465) 518

 

APPEALS - Notice - Failure to sign - Notice must be signed personally by appellant in criminal appeals - Otherwise there is no competent appeal - And the court has no jurisdiction (H2) Ikuepenikan v. State (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1273; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1465) 518

 

APPEALS - Notice - Filing - Non compliance - Waiver - 5th respondent having failed to object to the irregularity in filing of the notice - Cannot now be allowed to complain of an occurrence he had thought little of (H2) Obi v. INEC (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2773; (2009) 18 NWLR (Pt.1172) 215

 

APPEALS - Notice - Filing - Non compliance with CA Rules O. 3 r. 2(1) - As to the venue to file appeal - Would only confer right to ask the court - To pronounce the notice void (H1) Obi v. INEC (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2773; (2009) 18 NWLR (Pt.1172) 215

 

APPEALS - Notice - Multiple filing - The mere fact of filing multiple notices does not render the appeal incompetent - As 1st respondent relied on one of the notices - And has not disclosed any injury he suffered (H2) Yaki v. Bagudu (2015) 11 KLR (pt. 374) 3503; (2015) 18 NWLR (Pt.1491) 288

 

APPEALS - Notice of - CA Rules O. 6 r. 2(1) - Every appeal shall be initiated through a notice of appeal - And any defect in it would render the appeal incompetent (H2) Ikechukwu v. FRN (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 845; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 1

 

APPEALS - Notice of - Filing - Proper venue - Party aggrieved by decision of any HC - Shall file his notice in registry of the trial court not that of CA - Save after compilation and transmission of record (H4) S.P.D.C. Nig. Ltd. v. Agbara (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3707; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1496) 353

 

APPEALS - Notice of - Filing fees - Miscalculation of - Mistake made by the court registry officials in assessing the fees - Cannot be visited on appellant (H8) S.P.D.C. Nig. Ltd. v. Agbara (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3707; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1496) 353

 

APPEALS - Notice of - Inadequate filing fees - Payment of inadequate filing fees can only make a process irregular - And not capable of affecting jurisdiction of the court (H7) S.P.D.C. Nig. Ltd. v. Agbara (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3707; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1496) 353

 

APPEALS - Notice of - Multiple filing - Appellant may file several notices but must rely on one - Hence appellants’ amended notice filed within time was properly filed (H6) S.P.D.C. Nig. Ltd. v. Agbara (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3707; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1496) 353

 

APPEALS - Notice of - Signing - Iwunze v. FRN - Notice in criminal appeal must be personally signed by appellant - Save where circumstances warrant his counsel to discharge such duty for him (H3) Ikechukwu v. FRN (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 845; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 1

 

APPEALS - Notice of appeal - Double filing - It is permissible to file two notices of appeal within time - And appellant who does so is not blameworthy on the side of caution (H1) FRN v. Dairo (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 211; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1454) 141

 

APPEALS - Notice of appeal - Double filing - Options - Where validly filed - Appellant would be right to apply for leave to either consolidate such notices - Or to withdraw all except one (H2) FRN v. Dairo (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 211; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1454) 141

 

APPEALS - Notices of appeal - Consolidation of - CA having granted 1st respondent leave to consolidate - The contention that reliance was placed on the two notices in same appeal is of no moment (H3) FRN v. Dairo (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 211; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1454) 141

 

APPEALS - Parties - Interested parties - Petition against 3rd-36th respondents having been dismissed - Any appeal against the decision gives them sufficient interest (H4) Ihedioha v. Okorocha (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3287; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1492) 147

 

APPEALS - Party - Joinder of - Appellant’s application for joinder lacks merit and is abuse of court process - As he has no business in the appeal (H5) Odedo v. PDP (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2007

 

APPEALS - Pleadings - Defence - Failure to raise - Appellant cannot rely on defence not pleaded at trial - Because respondent would have due to his failure - Lost opportunity of calling evidence to controvert (H10) Unity Life & Fire Insurance Ltd. v. Int’l Bank of W. Africa (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2821; (2001) 7 NWLR (Pt.713) 610

 

APPEALS - Preliminary objection - Basis - Under SC Rules 1999 preliminary objection is not restricted to grounds of law or facts - And even if affidavit is struck out - Grounds for the objection is intact (H2) PPA v. INEC (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2941; (2012) 13 NWLR (Pt.1317) 215

 

APPEALS - Preliminary objection - Incorporated in brief - CA Rules O. 3 r. 15 - Notice of the objection raised in brief - To which appellant has reacted - Is sufficient compliance with the rule (H1) Wema Securities & Finance Plc. v. Nig. Agric. Insu. Corp. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2557; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 93

 

APPEALS - Preliminary objection - Purpose - Issue in the objection must be first resolved - As its resolution obviates the need for the dissipation of time - In determination of appeal on the merit (H3) Ikuepenikan v. State (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1273; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1465) 518

 

APPEALS - Purpose of - It is to find out whether on the state of pleadings, evidence and applicable law - The lower court came to right decision - In relation to reliefs canvassed in the matter (H1) Odom v. PDP (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 677; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1456) 527

 

APPEALS - Record - Binding nature of - Appellate court has no jurisdiction to read into record what it does not contain - As court must read and apply exact content of the record without more (H2) Ogwe v. Inspector General Police (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 499; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1459) 505

 

APPEALS - Record - Compilation - CA Rules 2007 - Appellant can compile record upon failure of registrar to do so - And respondent in such a situation is at liberty to compile additional records (H3) Michael v. Bank of the North (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1711; (2015) 12 NWLR (Pt.1473) 370

 

APPEALS - Record - Completeness of - It is counsel’s duty to ensure that record is complete - And a party cannot complain if a ground is not considered - Since he had opportunity to regularize the record (H4) Michael v. Bank of the North (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1711; (2015) 12 NWLR (Pt.1473) 370

 

APPEALS - Reply brief - Failure to file - Although filing of reply is not mandatory - But where appellant failed to reply to issue raised by respondent - It may amount to a concession of the point raised (H2) S.P.D.C. Nig. Ltd. v. Agbara (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3707; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1496) 353

 

APPEALS - Reply brief - Purpose - The brief is filed as a reply to new points raised by respondent - And is not meant to fill lacuna or error in appellant’s brief (H1) Nyesom v. Peterside (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3361; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1492) 71

 

APPEALS - Reply brief - Purpose - Where respondent’s brief raises issue on points of law not covered in appellant’s brief - Appellant should file a reply to deal with such new points (H1) S.P.D.C. Nig. Ltd. v. Agbara (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3707; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1496) 353

 

APPEALS - Res judicata - Application - Parties and subject matter in present appeal being different from the previous appeal - CA was wrong to apply the principle of res judicata (H2) Ogbolosingha v. Bayelsa S.I.E.C. (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 461; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1455) 311

 

APPEALS - Right - Condition - Appellant’s right to appeal is not absolute - As procedures from the enforcement of the right must be complied with (H5)

 

APPEALS - Right - Ground of law - Notice of the cross appeal hinged on grounds of law is competent - And cross appellants did not require leave to file same (H4) Ogbolosingha v. Bayelsa S.I.E.C. (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 461; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1455) 311

 

APPEALS - Right - Limit - No right including right of appeal is absolute - As preaction notice is a condition for exercise of right to bring action - And not an abridgment of that right (H4) Yaki v. Bagudu (2015) 11 KLR (pt. 374) 3503; (2015) 18 NWLR (Pt.1491) 288

 

APPEALS - Right of - Extension of time - Having satisfied two preconditions for the grant of the order - Respondents ought not to be deprived of their constitutionally guaranteed right of appeal (H5) Lafferi Nig. Ltd. v. Nal Merchant Bank Plc. (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1459; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1478) 64

 

APPEALS - Right of - Or with leave - Distinction - 1999 Constitution s. 243(1)(a) - A party can exercise right of appeal - While person having an interest can only exercise his right of appeal with leave (H2) Assams v. Ararume (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3629; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1493) 368

 

APPEALS - Striking out - SC Act ss. 22 & 26 - Where an appeal has been struck out - There is nothing upon which to invoke the sections - To hear and determine the appeal by SC (H5) Abah v. Monday (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1569; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1480) 569

 

APPEALS - Success of - Basis - Where appellant fails to satisfy appellate court - That lower court was wrong in its application of facts to applicable law - His appeal will fail (H3) Omisore v. Aregbesola (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1821; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1482) 205

 

APPEALS - Supreme Court - Hearing - Limit - The court hears appeals from valid judgments of CA - And having held a part of CA’s decision as nullity - It has no jurisdiction to determine appellant’s issue (H3) Ominiyi v. Alabi (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 711; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1456) 572

 

APPEALS - Supreme Court - Judgment - Supremacy of - The court cannot sit on appeal over its judgment - And its power in appropriate cases to set aside its judgment - Does not amount to appellate jurisdiction (H1) Jev v. Iyortom (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 601; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1483) 484

 

APPEALS - Supreme Court - Judgment of - Supremacy s. 287(1) 1999 Constitution - Earlier decision same day - That nullifies a lower court’s decision - Binds SC in a subsequent same day matter - That can no more be continuation of the nullified case (H4) Akpamgbo-Okadigbo v. Chidi (2) (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 759; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 124

 

ARBITRATION - Contracts - Arbitration clause - Is a procedural provision whereby parties agree - That only disputes should be submitted to arbitration - And it does not limit rights or remedies of parties (H2) Onyekwuluje v. Benue State Govt. (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2043; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 40

 

ARMED ROBBERY - Conspiracy - Conviction - Based solely on testimony of PW2 cannot stand - As testimony of the witness is unreliable - Since he failed to identify appellant at earliest time (H5) Idemudia v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2369; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1488) 375

 

ARMED ROBBERY - Evidence - Contradiction in - Weight - Conflict as regards date of the offence created material doubt - As to whether the incident actually occurred (H2) Sani v. State (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2115; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1483) 522

 

ARMED ROBBERY - Identification parade - Conduct of - It is essential when there is dispute as to identity of accused - But where no dispute exists - There will be no need for the parade (H3) Okanlawon v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2431; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 445

 

ARMED ROBBERY - Identification parade - Failure to conduct - Absence of conducting the parade - As well as failure to report the incident to Police timeously - Cast doubts on prosecution’s case (H3) Sale v. State (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3679; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 392

 

ARMED ROBBERY - Ingredients - Conspiracy - Where ingredients of armed robbery have been established - Criminal conspiracy can properly be inferred (H2) Sale v. State (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3679; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 392

 

ARMED ROBBERY - Ingredients - Proof - Beyond appellant’s confessional statement - Testimonies of PW1 & 5 establish that there was armed robbery - And that appellant was among the robbers (H3) Fabiyi v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2349; (2015) 18 NWLR (Pt.1490) 80

 

ARMED ROBBERY - Ingredients - Proof - Prosecution must prove factual reality of a robbery - Participation of accused in the robbery - And that he was armed with firearms (H4) Ibrahim v. State (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 995; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1469) 164

 

ARMED ROBBERY - Ingredients - Proof - Prosecution must prove that there was robbery - That the robbers were armed - And that accused was the armed robber or one of the armed robbers (H1) Okanlawon v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2431; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 445

 

ARMED ROBBERY - Ingredients - Proof - Prosecution needs to establish that there was robbery - That the robbery was armed robbery - And that appellant took part in the robbery (H4) Kolawole v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 411; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1460) 134

 

ARMED ROBBERY - Medical report - Admissibility - The report having been admitted without objection - And without asking for the presence of the maker - It is late to complain of his absence (H5) Kolawole v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 411; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1460) 134

 

ARMED ROBBERY - Proof - Contradictions - Raised for appellant did not affect credibility of witnesses - Since he was arrested at the crime scene - Hence his involvement in the crime was rightly found (H2) Uche v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1731; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1470) 380

 

ARMED ROBBERY - Proof - Failure in PW testimony - Non direction by trial court on effect of failure to name appellant - Occasioned a miscarriage of justice (H5) Ibrahim v. State (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 995; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1469) 164

 

ARMED ROBBERY - Proof - Identification parade - Appellant cannot be said to have been identified by evidence of PW2 - As the trial court did not weigh the evidence - To prevent mistaken identity (H9) Sale v. State (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3679; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 392

 

ARMED ROBBERY - Proof - Ingredients - Prosecution must prove that there was robbery - That the same was armed robbery - And that appellant was one of those who took part in the armed robbery (H1) Sale v. State (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3679; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 392

 

ARMED ROBBERY - Proof - Prosecution failed to prove any ingredient of the offence - As there is no credible evidence to link appellant with the offence (H1) Sani v. State (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2115; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1483) 522

 

ARMED ROBBERY - Proof - PW2 having failed to identify appellant as to fix him at the crime scene - Cannot be accorded the status of a credible witness - To sustain the proof required of prosecution (H3) Idemudia v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2369; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1488) 375

 

ARMED ROBBERY - Stolen item - Recent possession - Presumption is that the person in possession is either the thief - Or received the property knowing it to have been stolen (H2) Kolawole v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 411; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1460) 134

 

BANKING - Document - Admissibility - Secondary evidence - Form of - Under E.A. s. 96(2)(e) is a copy of entry in banker’s book - Which is admissible under certain conditions (H2) Unity Life & Fire Insurance Ltd. v. Int’l Bank of W. Africa (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2821; (2001) 7 NWLR (Pt.713) 610

 

BANKING - Document - Entry in banker’s book - Admissibility - E.A. s. 96(1)(h) - Secondary evidence may be given of contents of a document - When inter alia the document is entry in banker’s book (H1) Unity Life & Fire Insurance Ltd. v. Int’l Bank of W. Africa (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2821; (2001) 7 NWLR (Pt.713) 610

 

BANKING - Loan facility - Liability - Appellant’s liability under the Deed of Guarantee includes - Interest, commission and banking charges - As clearly indicated in clauses 1-3 and 10 (H11) Unity Life & Fire Insurance Ltd. v. Int’l Bank of W. Africa (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2821; (2001) 7 NWLR (Pt.713) 610

 

BANKING - Statement of account - Admissibility of - Failure to object - As no objection was raised - Appellant is deemed to have consented - Although conditions precedent for its admissibility were not established (H3) Unity Life & Fire Insurance Ltd. v. Int’l Bank of W. Africa (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2821; (2001) 7 NWLR (Pt.713) 610

 

CARRIAGE BY AIR - Liability - Limit - Exception - In view of appellant’s wilful misconduct - Its liability cannot be restricted to the amount in Article 22(2) of CAO - As damages is awarded once wilful misconduct is established (H1) British Airways v. Atoyebi (2015) 11 KLR (pt. 374) 3425; (2014) 13 NWLR (Pt.1424) 253

 

CHARGES - Arraignment - Fair hearing - Reading and explanation of charge must be in language spoken by accused - So as to ensure his right to fair hearing enshrined in 1999 Constitution s. 36(6) (H3) Mohammed v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 439

 

CHARGES - Arraignment - Requirement - Charge must be read and explained to accused in language he understands - And to the satisfaction of court - Before he is called upon to plead thereto (H1) Daniel v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1757; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 119

 

CHARGES - Arraignment - Validity of - Once accused pleads to a charge without objection - It is presumed that he understands the charge preferred against him (H1) Olaolu v. Federal Republic of Nigeria (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1797

 

CHARGES - Arraignment - Validity of - Since the charge contains 6 counts - It is unnecessary to read out and explain each count before plea is taken - Hence CPL s. 215 was fully complied with (H4) Mohammed v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 439

 

CHARGES - Arraignment - Validity of - There was no breach of requirements of arraignment - As appellant perfectly understood the charge that was read and explained to her (H1) Blessing v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1653; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 1

 

CHARGES - Drafting - Omissions - Weight - Non material errors in stating particulars of offence are of no moment - Unless accused was in fact misled by such error (H2) Ibrahim v. State (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 995; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1469) 164

 

CHARGES - Fair hearing - Breach - Allegation of - Bias against the trial court was uncalled for - As appellant was given adequate opportunity to be heard - And was heard in defence of the charge against him (H11) Okanlawon v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2431; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 445

 

CHARGES - Institution of - Powers of A-G Federation - The offences being federal indictment - The A-G may by himself or through an agent - Prosecute the offences alleged (H3) Dariye v. FRN (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 529; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1467) 325

 

CHARGES - Language of - Fair hearing - 1999 Constitution s. 6(a) - Every person charged with an offence - Shall be informed promptly in language he understands and in details - Of nature of the offence (H1) Ibrahim v. State (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 995; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1469) 164

 

CHARGES - Murder - Proof - Date of death - Contained in the charge cannot be presumed - As it is an ingredient of the charge to be proved beyond reasonable doubt (H3) Zubairu v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1919; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1486) 504

 

CHARGES - Objection - Time - Objection to a charge for any formal defect - Shall be taken immediately after the charge had been read over to accused - Before he takes his plea (H3) Ibrahim v. State (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 995; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1469) 164

 

CHARGES - Plea - Meaning of - To give a plea is for accused to formally respond to criminal charge - Either pleading guilty or not guilty (H4) Daniel v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1757; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 119

 

CHARGES - Plea - Objection - Where accused pleads to charge before the court without objection - It is presupposed that he understood the charge preferred against him (H3) Daniel v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1757; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 119

 

CHARGES - Plea - Presumption of regularity - Where charge is read to accused and his plea is taken and recorded - Presumption is that court is satisfied that charge was explained to accused (H2) Daniel v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1757; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 119

 

CHARGES - Substantive charge and conspiracy - Proof - The approach is to deal with main charge before conspiracy - And failure to prove main charge does not make conviction for conspiracy inappropriate (H5) Okanlawon v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2431; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 445

 

CHIEFTAINCY MATTERS - Actions - Limitation - Okere v. Amadi - By virtue of this decision of SC - No constitutional provision voids limitation period in chieftaincy matters (H7) Ibrahim v. Lawal (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 1949; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 490

 

CHIEFTAINCY MATTERS - Court - Jurisdiction - Condition for the court to assume jurisdiction in the matter - Exists with the obvious complaints lodged which received no response (H6) Kayih v. Yilbuk (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 625; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 26

 

CHIEFTAINCY MATTERS - Courts - State HC - Jurisdiction - Chieftaincy matter - Chiefs Law s. 3(2) that ousts unlimited jurisdiction of the court is null and void - Hence the court has jurisdiction to entertain the matter (H4) Kayih v. Yilbuk (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 625; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 26

 

CHIEFTAINCY MATTERS - Evidence - Admitted fact - Weight - The fact of rotation of the chieftaincy title having been admitted - It is deemed as proved and needed no further proof (H8) Kayih v. Yilbuk (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 625; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 26

 

CHIEFTAINCY MATTERS - Evidence - Unchallenged - Evidence of series of letters of complaint made without a response - Is a matter court is enjoined to act on as unchallenged evidence (H5) Kayih v. Yilbuk (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 625; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 26

 

COMPANY LAW - Fraud - Lifting the veil - Court will not allow a party to use its company as cover to defraud an innocent person - Who entered into lawful contract with it (H2) Oyebanji v. State (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2255; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1479) 270

 

CONFLICT OF LAWS - Constitution - Supremacy - State HC -Jurisdiction - In view of the supremacy of the Constitution - Any law which tends to limit jurisdiction of the court - Is null and void (H3) Kayih v. Yilbuk (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 625; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 26

 

CONFLICT OF LAWS - Constitution - Supremacy of - With regard to joinder of appellants in the matter - 1999 Constitution s. 1(1)(3) prevails over FHC Rules O. 9 r. 14(1) (H5) Akpamgbo-Okadigbo v. Chidi (1) (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 953; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 124

 

CONFLICT OF LAWS - Conviction - Validity - Appellate court will not set aside conviction made under a repealed law - If at the time there was existing law under which the conviction should have been made (H1) Adonike v. State (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 11; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1458) 237

 

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - Courts - State HC - Jurisdiction - Constitution 1999 s. 272(1) - The court has unlimited jurisdiction to hear and determine - Any civil proceeding in which the existence of legal right is in issue (H2) Kayih v. Yilbuk (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 625; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 26

 

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - Admiralty - Jurisdiction - Prior to promulgation of Decree no. 59 of 1991 - State HC can by virtue of unlimited jurisdiction conferred on it by Constitution 1979 - Exercise concurrent jurisdiction in respect of matters under FHC Act s. 7 (H1) SPDC Nig. Ltd. v. Anaro (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2281; (2015) 12 NWLR (Pt.1472) 122

 

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - Appeals - As of right - Or with leave - Distinction - 1999 Constitution s. 243(1)(a) - A party can exercise right of appeal - While person having an interest can only exercise his right of appeal with leave (H2) Assams v. Ararume (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3629; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1493) 368

 

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - Appeals - Grounds - Competence of - By virtue of Constitution 1999 s. 233(2)(a) - Appeal will lie as of right to SC on ground 7 - Which questions the jurisdiction of CA to determine the suit (H3) Iragbiji v. Oyewole (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3099; (2013) 13 NWLR (Pt.1372) 566

 

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - Appeals - Right of - Extension of time - Having satisfied two preconditions for the grant of the order - Respondents ought not to be deprived of their constitutionally guaranteed right of appeal (H5) Lafferi Nig. Ltd. v. Nal Merchant Bank Plc. (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1459; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1478) 64

 

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - Charges - Arraignment - Fair hearing - Reading and explanation of charge must be in language spoken by accused - So as to ensure his right to fair hearing enshrined in 1999 Constitution s. 36(6) (H3) Mohammed v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 439

 

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - Charges - Language of - Fair hearing - 1999 Constitution s. 6(a) - Every person charged with an offence - Shall be informed promptly in language he understands and in details - Of nature of the offence (H1) Ibrahim v. State (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 995; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1469) 164

 

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - Constitution ­- Holistic interpretation - Entire provisions of the Constitution must be read together as a whole - In ensuring the enthronement of real intention of the framers (H1) Abegunde v. Ondo State H.A. (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1111; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1461) 314

 

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - Constitution - Interpretation - Where words used are clear and free from ambiguity - They should be given their natural meaning - Without any embellishment (H1) Assams v. Ararume (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3629; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1493) 368

 

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - Constitution - Supremacy - State HC -Jurisdiction - In view of the supremacy of the Constitution - Any law which tends to limit jurisdiction of the court - Is null and void (H3) Kayih v. Yilbuk (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 625; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 26

 

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - Constitution - Supremacy of - It is the norm validating norm - Being the yardstick by which the validity of legislations made thereunder can be tested and determined (H4) ACN v. INEC (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3031; (2013) 13 NWLR (Pt.1370) 161

 

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - Constitution - Supremacy of - With regard to joinder of appellants in the matter - 1999 Constitution s. 1(1)(3) prevails over FHC Rules O. 9 r. 14(1) (H5) Akpamgbo-Okadigbo v. Chidi (1) (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 953; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 124

 

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - Criminal procedure - Institution of - State A-G - Powers of - 1999 Constitution s. 211(1) - The A-G can validly commence criminal proceedings - For any offence created under an Act of NA (H2) Mohammed v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 439

 

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - Election petitions - Appeals - Hearing - Time limit - The appeal is statute barred by virtue of Constitution 1999 s. 285(7) - Hence Supreme Court has no jurisdiction to entertain it (H3) ACN v. INEC (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3031; (2013) 13 NWLR (Pt.1370) 161

 

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - Election petitions - Gubernatorial - Final court - Constitution 1999 s. 246 deprives SC of jurisdiction - To deal with gubernatorial election petition - As CA is the final court (H1) Sha’aban v. Sambo (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2975; (2010) 19 NWLR (Pt.1226) 353

 

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - Election petitions - Jurisdiction - 1999 Constitution s. 285 - FHC lacks jurisdiction to entertain appellant’s suit - As the matter clearly belongs to Election Petition Tribunal (H1) ANPP v. Returning Officer Abia State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2855; (2007) 11 NWLR (Pt.1045) 431

 

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - Election petitions - Preelection - Jurisdiction - FHC - Concurrent jurisdiction conferred on FHC by Evidence Act in pre & post election matters - Is in addition to its exclusive jurisdiction in s. 251 of Constitution 1999 (H4) Lokpobiri v. Ogola (2015) 11 KLR (pt. 374) 3461; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 328; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 328

 

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - Election petitions - Tribunal - Composition of - Constitution 1999 s. 285(4) - The Tribunal was not properly constituted to determine the petition - Hence any decision it reached was a nullity (H3) MPPP v. INEC (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3335

 

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - Election petitions - Tribunal - Establishment of - The Tribunal having been established under Constitution 1999 s. 285(2) - The act of its establishment cannot be said to be a futuristic event (H2) Nyesom v. Peterside (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3361; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1492) 71

 

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - Fair hearing - Breach - Effect - Decision of CA arising from the issue raised suo motu - And without hearing the parties is a nullity - For being a breach of constitutional right to fair hearing (H2) Ominiyi v. Alabi (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 711; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1456) 572

 

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - Judgments - Validity - CA judgment is in breach of Constitution 1999 s. 285(8) - As a judgment must show clear resolution of all issues - And end with ultimate verdict flowing from facts and law (H1) CPC v. Yuguda (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2859; (2013) 7 NWLR (Pt.1354) 450

 

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - Jurisdiction of Election Tribunal and Court of Appeal in respect of election petitions - Is derived from the Constitution 1999 (as amended) (H4) Dankwambo v. Abubakar (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3237; (2016) 2 NWLR (Pt.1495) 157

 

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - Supreme Court - Judgment of - Supremacy s. 287(1) 1999 Constitution - Earlier decision same day - That nullifies a lower court’s decision - Binds SC in a subsequent same day matter - That can no more be continuation of the nullified case (H4) Akpamgbo-Okadigbo v. Chidi (2) (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 759; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 124

 

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - Tribunals - Impeachment panel - Finding - Ekiti State HA violated 1999 Constitution s. 188(8) by setting up second panel - Hence proceedings conducted by the panel was exercise in futility (H5) APC v. PDP (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1179; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1481) 1

 

CONTRACTS - Arbitration clause - Is a procedural provision whereby parties agree - That only disputes should be submitted to arbitration - And it does not limit rights or remedies of parties (H2) Onyekwuluje v. Benue State Govt. (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2043; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 40

 

CONTRACTS - Breach - Damages - Court is concerned with damages which are natural and probable consequences of the breach - Or damages within the contemplation of parties (H1) Agu v. General Oil Ltd. (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1155; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1488) 327

 

CONTRACTS - Breach - Damages - Pleadings - Award of general damages based on the unsubstantiated allegation - In addition to special damages awarded - Amounted to double compensation (H3) Agu v. General Oil Ltd. (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1155; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1488) 327

 

CONTRACTS - Breach - Speculative damages - Court should not consider damages which are speculative - Unless they are specifically provided for - By express terms of the contract (H2) Agu v. General Oil Ltd. (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1155; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1488) 327

 

CONTRACTS - Contract of service - Proof - Aggrieved employee following termination from service - Must plead and prove his contract of service - To substantiate his claim (H1) Aji v. Chad Basin Dev. Auth. (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 937; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1486) 554

 

CONTRACTS - Fraud - Lifting the veil - Court will not allow a party to use its company as cover to defraud an innocent person - Who entered into lawful contract with it (H2) Oyebanji v. State (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2255; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1479) 270

 

CONTRACTS - Insurance - Claim - Jurisdiction - To entertain claim based on simple contract of insurance - Is not vested exclusively on FHC - Rather the jurisdiction is vested on High Courts of the States (H2) Sun Insu. Nig. Plc. v. Umez Eng. Const. Co Ltd. (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2319; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1471) 576

 

CONTRACTS - Jurisdiction - As the action is on simple contract - FHC cannot arrogate itself jurisdiction - Hence CA wrongfully held that trial court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the action (H4) Wema Securities & Finance Plc. v. Nig. Agric. Insu. Corp. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2557; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 93

 

CONTRACTS - Jurisdiction - Privity of - Respondents had no ground to sue appellant under the lease agreement - As absence of locus standi deprived trial court of jurisdiction to entertain the matter (H2) Rebold Ind. Ltd. v. Magreola (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1349; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1461) 210

 

CONTRACTS - Privity of - Only parties to a contract can enforce it - Third party to a contract cannot do so - Even if the contract was made for his benefit (H1) Rebold Ind. Ltd. v. Magreola (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1349; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1461) 210

 

CONTRACTS - Statutes - Public Officers Protection Act - Application of - S. 2 of the Act does not apply to cases of contract - Otherwise it will negate the general principles of law of contract (H6) Wema Securities & Finance Plc. v. Nig. Agric. Insu. Corp. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2557; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 93

 

CONVICTION - Accident - Dangerous driving - Proof - Exhibit C was prima facie evidence of dangerous driving - And a sufficient circumstantial evidence required to sustain a conviction (H1) Adeyemo v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1591; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1485) 311

 

CONVICTION - Armed robbery - Conspiracy - Conviction - Based solely on testimony of PW2 cannot stand - As testimony of the witness is unreliable - Since he failed to identify appellant at earliest time (H5) Idemudia v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2369; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1488) 375

 

CONVICTION - Charges - Substantive charge and conspiracy - Proof - The approach is to deal with main charge before conspiracy - And failure to prove main charge does not make conviction for conspiracy inappropriate (H5) Okanlawon v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2431; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 445

 

CONVICTION - Circumstantial evidence - Weight - In absence of direct evidence - Conviction may be based on circumstantial evidence - Provided it points to the guilt of accused (H5) Iliyasu v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 559; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1469) 26

 

CONVICTION - Circumstantial evidence - Weight - It is often the best evidence but sparingly applied - Hence to ground a conviction - Such evidence must point to the guilt of accused (H1) Oketaolegun v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2531; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1477) 538

 

CONVICTION - Confession - Conviction based solely on confessional statement that is unequivocal - Prevails on appeal in spite of absence of any corroborating evidence (H2) Fabiyi v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2349; (2015) 18 NWLR (Pt.1490) 80

 

CONVICTION - Confession - Court can convict accused on his confession - And such confession does not require corroboration - If it meets the requirements of the law (H3) Alo v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 331; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1464) 238

 

CONVICTION - Confession - Court can convict on confession alone - Where it is unequivocal as to guilt of accused - Hence retraction of same will not vitiate its admission (H5) Blessing v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1653; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 1

 

CONVICTION - Confession - Retraction - Court can convict on a retracted statement - But it is desirable to find external evidence that makes it probable that the confession was true (H2) Busari v. State (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 53; (2015) 5 NWLR (Pt.1452) 343

 

CONVICTION - Confession - Where confession is established to be positive and unequivocal - The same will suffice to ground a finding of guilt - Regardless of any retraction (H9) Okanlawon v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2431; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 445

 

CONVICTION - Evidence - Best evidence - For purpose of conviction is voluntary confession to the crime by accused - And a conviction based on oral confession is proper in law (H6) Jua v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2873; (2010) 4 NWLR (Pt.1184) 217

 

CONVICTION - Evidence - Confession - Retraction - The fact that accused has retracted a confession - Does not mean that court cannot act and rely on same - To convict him (H2) State v. Gwan (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2469; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1477) 600

 

CONVICTION - Evidence - Criminal trial - Similar facts - Where accused is jointly tried with another - And their case is clearly interwoven - Conviction of one cannot stand where the other was discharged and acquitted (H10) Alo v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 331; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1464) 238

 

CONVICTION - Identification parade - Necessity of - It is a must for conviction where victim did not know accused before the offence - Where victim was confronted by accused for a very short time (H4) Sale v. State (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3679; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 392

 

CONVICTION - Murder - Circumstantial evidence - Accused can be convicted of murder - Where there is cogent and compelling circumstantial evidence - To the fact that he killed the victim (H1) Jua v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2873; (2010) 4 NWLR (Pt.1184) 217

 

CONVICTION - Murder - Circumstantial evidence - Where there is no direct evidence - Court can draw inference from proved facts - Going by circumstances surrounding the cause of death (H8) Alo v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 331; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1464) 238

 

CONVICTION - Murder - Corpus delicti - Absence of - Corpus delicti is not produced in all cases to secure conviction - As accused can be convicted where there is evidence linking him with killing of deceased (H5) Jua v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2873; (2010) 4 NWLR (Pt.1184) 217

 

CONVICTION - Murder - Ingredients - Proof - For prosecution to secure a conviction - He must prove that deceased died - That the death was due to act of appellant - And that the act was intentional (H1) Maiyaki v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2735; (2008) 15 NWLR (Pt.1109) 173

 

CONVICTION - Murder - Proof - Absence of autopsy - Where evidence abound that deceased had died - But autopsy was not conducted - Accused may be convicted on circumstantial evidence (H3) Princewill v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2801; (1994) 6 NWLR (Pt.353) 703

 

CONVICTION - Murder - Proof - Standard of - To secure conviction for murder - Prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt - That the death of deceased was caused directly or indirectly by act of accused (H5) Princewill v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2801; (1994) 6 NWLR (Pt.353) 703

 

CONVICTION - Narcotic drug - Prosecution must inter alia prove that the drug is in the possession of accused - That it was knowingly in his possession - And that it is Indian hemp (H3) Blessing v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1653; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 1

 

CONVICTION - Proof - Burden of - Evidence Act s. 38 - Accused in criminal trials would not be convicted - Unless prosecution proves the offence beyond reasonable doubt (H7) Ibrahim v. State (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 995; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1469) 164

 

CONVICTION - Proof - Forensic evidence - Where exhibits point unequivocally to guilt of accused - Forensic is not necessary and accused can be convicted of the offence (H3) Jua v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2873; (2010) 4 NWLR (Pt.1184) 217

 

CONVICTION - Robbery - Even if Exhibit E was expunged from the record - There was still evidence to find guilt of robbery - Hence appellant was rightly convicted for robbery (H1) Pius v. State (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1053; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1459) 628

 

CONVICTION - Validity - Appellate court will not set aside conviction made under a repealed law - If at the time there was existing law under which the conviction should have been made (H1) Adonike v. State (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 11; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1458) 237

 

CONVICTION - Written law - Constitution 1999 s. 36(12) - No person can be convicted for an offence - Unless that offence is defined and penalty prescribed in a written law (H5) Roda v. FRN (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 121; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1468) 427

 

CORROBORATION - Confession - Conviction - Where based solely on confessional statement that is unequivocal - Prevails on appeal in spite of absence of any corroborating evidence (H2) Fabiyi v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2349; (2015) 18 NWLR (Pt.1490) 80

 

CORROBORATION - Confession - Exhibits G & H offered corroborative materials - And a consistent picture of the incident - In a way that appellant’s statement cannot be doubted (H1) Kolawole v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 411; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1460) 134

 

CORROBORATION - Conviction - Confession - Court can convict accused on his confession - And such confession does not require corroboration - If it meets the requirements of the law (H3) Alo v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 331; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1464) 238

 

CORROBORATION - Conviction - Confession - Retraction - Court can convict on a retracted statement - But it is desirable to find external evidence that makes it probable that the confession was true (H2) Busari v. State (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 53; (2015) 5 NWLR (Pt.1452) 343

 

CORROBORATION - Evidence - Tainted witness - Where a witness is said to be tainted - Court must warn itself before admitting his evidence - And if he is an accomplice - His evidence requires corroboration (H2) Pius v. State (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1053; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1459) 628

 

CORROBORATION - Meaning of - For evidence to be corroborative - It must be an independent testimony which affects accused - By connecting or tending to connect him with the crime (H5) State v. Gwan (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2469; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1477) 600

 

CORROBORATION - Murder - Death - Proof - From evidence of PW2 which corroborated that of PW1 - And the medical report presented by PW4 - There is no contradiction that the deceased is dead (H1) Ali v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1611; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 1

 

CORROBORATION - Rape - Proof - Evidence from PW3 and exhibit A support case of PW1 that she was violated by appellant - Hence the lower courts were right that both evidence confirm that of PW1 (H3) Adonike v. State (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 11; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1458) 237

 

COURT MARTIAL - Composition of - Defect in - Once a member is disqualified - Everything done by the court is a nullity - As the defect renders the court incompetent - And without jurisdiction (H1) Zakari v. Nigerian Army (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1533; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1487) 77

 

COURT MARTIAL - Composition of - Objection - Failure to object to membership of an unqualified officer of the court - Does not bar the party to raise same objection bordering on jurisdiction on appeal (H2) Zakari v. Nigerian Army (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1533; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1487) 77

 

COURT PROCESSES - Abuse - Features - It manifests in improper use of judicial process by party - To interfere with due administration of justice (H5) Lokpobiri v. Ogola (2015) 11 KLR (pt. 374) 3461; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 328

 

COURT PROCESSES - Actions - Commencement - Abuse of process - Appellant’s fresh action in Bayelsa State on same subject matter as the one pending in Abuja - Is vexatious and abuse of process (H6) Lokpobiri v. Ogola (2015) 11 KLR (pt. 374) 3461; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 328

 

COURT PROCESSES - Appeals - Filing - Document or process is deemed duly filed when it is taken to court registry - Assessed by officer assigned the responsibility and paid for (H4) Ogwe v. Inspector General Police (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 499; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1459) 505

 

COURT PROCESSES - Appeals - Filing - Payment of fees - Where inadequate fees are paid - Court can order for the short fall to be paid - As the omission does not rob the court of its jurisdiction (H5) Ogwe v. Inspector General Police (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 499; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1459) 505

 

COURT PROCESSES - Appeals - Filing fees - Inadequacy of - Remedy - Where there is insufficient filing fee on document placed before the registry - Court should direct that such shortfall be remedied (H11) S.P.D.C. Nig. Ltd. v. Agbara (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3707; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1496) 353

 

COURT PROCESSES - Appeals - Misuse of - Order to be made - Where originating summons was used in contentious matter - Appellate court is not to go into the merits - But should strike out the matter (H2) Adeyelu II v. Oyewunmi (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2689

 

COURT PROCESSES - Appeals - Notice of - Inadequate filing fees - Payment of inadequate filing fees can only make a process irregular - And not capable of affecting jurisdiction of the court (H7) S.P.D.C. Nig. Ltd. v. Agbara (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3707; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1496) 353

 

COURT PROCESSES - Appeals - Party - Joinder of - Appellant’s application for joinder lacks merit and is abuse of court process - As he has no business in the appeal (H5) Odedo v. PDP (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2007

 

COURT PROCESSES - Courts - Decision - Functus officio - Registrar’s statement on issue of service of processes - Is not a decision of CA for which it became functus officio and could not reopen it (H1) Ihedioha v. Okorocha (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3287; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1492) 147

 

COURT PROCESSES - Election petitions - Filing - Time limit - Due to the peculiar nature of the matter - Any process filed out of time is incompetent - And is liable to be struck out (H9) Omisore v. Aregbesola (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1821; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1482) 205

 

COURT PROCESSES - Election petitions - Nature of - Time is of the essence in election petitions - Hence a slight infraction of the rules - Particularly those relating to time - Can be fatal to the process filed (H1) Yaki v. Bagudu (2015) 11 KLR (pt. 374) 3503; (2015) 18 NWLR (Pt.1491) 288

 

COURT PROCESSES - Legal practitioners - Abbreviated name - Processes signed in such name by qualified legal practitioner are not invalid - As nothing in LPA s. 2(1) prohibits the use of initials (H3) Dankwambo v. Abubakar (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3237; (2016) 2 NWLR (Pt.1495) 157

 

COURT PROCESSES - Legal practitioners - Signing of - Appellant’s statements of claim on which evidence was led were nullity - Same having been signed by person not entitled to practice as barrister and solicitor (H2) Hamzat v. Sanni (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 253; (2015) 5 NWLR (Pt.1453) 486

 

COURT PROCESSES - Service - Importance of - Service of originating process is precondition to exercise of jurisdiction - As where there is no service - Subsequent proceedings are nullity (H2) Ihedioha v. Okorocha (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3287; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1492) 147

 

COURT PROCESSES - Service - Jurisdiction - Where service is needed - Failure to effect same renders the proceedings void - As no court has jurisdiction where any of the parties was not served (H3) Compagnie Generale De Geopysique Nig. Ltd. v. Aminu (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 793; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1459) 577

 

COURTS - Accidents - Dangerous driving - Federal highway - Proof - The accident occurred along a road - Which was taken judicial notice of by both lower courts - As federal highway (H5) Adeyemo v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1591; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1485) 311

 

COURTS - Accidents - Defence - Challenge - Where the defence is raised - Prosecution must lead credible and admissible evidence - To convince court that the defence does not avail accused (H3) Maiyaki v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2735; (2008) 15 NWLR (Pt.1109) 173

 

COURTS - Actions - Civil matters - Proof - Standard of - Such matters are decided on balance of probabilities - Hence trial Area Court rightly found that evidence of respondents outweighed that of appellant (H3) Sakati v. Bako (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2085; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1480) 531

 

COURTS - Actions - Commencement - Abuse of process - Appellant’s fresh action in Bayelsa State on same subject matter as the one pending in Abuja - Is vexatious and abuse of process (H6) Lokpobiri v. Ogola (2015) 11 KLR (pt. 374) 3461; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 328

 

COURTS - Actions - Commencement - Limitation - Public Officers Protection Act - The plea can be raised by any of the respondents - And a successful defence under the Act ousts jurisdiction of court (H1) Sylva v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1067; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1486) 576

 

COURTS - Actions - Consolidation of - Conditions - Are inter alia that the suits must be pending in same court - And the right to relief claimed in each action - Arose out of the same transaction (H1) Ngere v. Okuruket ‘XIV’ (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2215; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1482) 392

 

COURTS - Actions - Determination - Basis - A case is decided on credible evidence led in trial court - And where no evidence is led - Nothing much can be achieved on appeal (H13) CBN v. Okojie (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2149; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1479) 231

 

COURTS - Actions - Lis pendens - Doctrine of - It prevents the transfer of right or taking of steps - Capable of foisting a state of helplessness on parties or court - During the pendency of an action in court (H2) Wambai v. Donatus (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3163; (2014) 14 NWLR (Pt.1427) 223

 

COURTS - Actions - Statute bar - Suit of 1st to 4th respondents at trial court was statute barred - And had robbed the court of jurisdiction to entertain the matter (H8) Ibrahim v. Lawal (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 1949; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 490

 

COURTS - Actions - Striking out - Effect - Once a matter is struck out by a court - The court lacks jurisdiction to make any subsequent order on it (H13) S.P.D.C. Nig. Ltd. v. Agbara (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3707; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1496) 353

 

COURTS - Administrative law - Commission of Inquiry - Function - Limit - The Commission of Inquiry appointed under s. 2(1) with terms of reference - Does not interfere with jurisdiction of High Court (H3) Kabirikim v. Emefor (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2907; (2009) 14 NWLR (Pt.1162) 602

 

COURTS - Admiralty - Jurisdiction - Prior to promulgation of Decree no. 59 of 1991 - State HC can by virtue of unlimited jurisdiction conferred on it by Constitution 1979 - Exercise concurrent jurisdiction in respect of matters under FHC Act s. 7 (H1) SPDC Nig. Ltd. v. Anaro (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2281; (2015) 12 NWLR (Pt.1472) 122

 

COURTS - Appeals - Actions - Consistency of - Appeal being a continuation of the original claim - CA rightly resolved issues that emanated from claim in the trial court (H13) Kayih v. Yilbuk (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 625; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 26

 

COURTS - Appeals - Application - Parties and subject matter in present appeal being different from the previous appeal - CA was wrong to apply the principle of res judicata (H2) Ogbolosingha v. Bayelsa S.I.E.C. (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 461; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1455) 311

 

COURTS - Appeals - Civil appeals - Filing fees - The fees are generally set out by Rules of Court - And paid to registrar of the court from which appeal emanates (H5) S.P.D.C. Nig. Ltd. v. Agbara (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3707; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1496) 353

 

COURTS - Appeals - Crime - Evidence - Re evaluation - Is only done where trial court erred in evaluating facts - Thereby empowering appellate court to re examine the whole facts - And come to an independent decision (H4) Ali v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1611; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 1

 

COURTS - Appeals - Determination of - There is no doubt that from the records - CA dealt with the complaint of appellant - Hence it pronounced on all issues raised (H4) FRN v. Dairo (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 211; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1454) 141

 

COURTS - Appeals - Discretion - CA rightly determined discretion of trial court - And held that the same was improperly exercised - As it caused a miscarriage of justice to respondent (H6) Daniel v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1757; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 119

 

COURTS - Appeals - Discretion - Exercise of - Must always be judicial and judicious - Hence discretion based on principle that inadequate filing fees is fatal to appeal - Is a wrong exercise of discretion (H9) S.P.D.C. Nig. Ltd. v. Agbara (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3707; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1496) 353

 

COURTS - Appeals - Discretion - Interference - Appellate court will not interfere with discretion of lower court - Simply because if faced with a similar application - It would have exercised discretion differently (H3) Lafferi Nig. Ltd. v. Nal Merchant Bank Plc. (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1459; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1478) 64

 

COURTS - Appeals - Dismissal - Subsequent order - Validity of - Having earlier dismissed respondents’ appeal - CA became functus officio - And as such its latter order for extension of time - Was made in error (H2) Dakan v. Asalu (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1691; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 47

 

COURTS - Appeals - Dismissal - Validity - Respondent’s oral application for dismissal is in order - And court has jurisdiction to strike out or dismiss appeal - Where appellant failed to prosecute same diligently (H4) Abah v. Monday (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1569; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1480) 569

 

COURTS - Appeals - Dismissal - Want of diligent prosecution - Appeal dismissed on failure to file appellant’s brief is final - And the court has no jurisdiction to revive it (H1) Dakan v. Asalu (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1691; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 47

 

COURTS - Appeals - Document - Admissibility of - Where document is unlawfully admitted without objection at trial - Appellant can still object on appeal - Particularly where miscarriage of justice occurred (H5) Unity Life & Fire Insurance Ltd. v. Int’l Bank of W. Africa (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2821; (2001) 7 NWLR (Pt.713) 610

 

COURTS - Appeals - Election - Academic issue - Courts should not spend judicial time on such issue - But since the present appeal is being heard and decided before 29/05/2015 - It is not an academic exercise (H2) Daniel v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 809; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1463) 113

 

COURTS - Appeals - Election petitions - Issue - Appeal before CA relates to the petition - As dismissal of the petition by the trial Tribunal - Gave rise to the appeal before Court of Appeal (H5) Dankwambo v. Abubakar (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3237; (2016) 2 NWLR (Pt.1495) 157

 

COURTS - Appeals - Evaluation - Issue as to whether party proved his claim - Cannot be determined without evaluating evidence - Hence CA rightly proceeded to evaluate the evidence and considered exhibits tendered (H6) Kabirikim v. Emefor (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2907; (2009) 14 NWLR (Pt.1162) 602

 

COURTS - Appeals - Evidence - Evaluation - Having lawfully excluded the inadmissible evidence - CA review of evidence due to failure of the trial court in that regard - Cannot be said to be perverse (H6) Odom v. PDP (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 677; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1456) 527

 

COURTS - Appeals - Evidence - Evaluation - Interference - Judgment of trial court on matters of credibility is binding - Hence CA was in error when it expunged exhibit AX from the records (H4) FRN v. Borishade (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 81; (2015) 5 NWLR (Pt.1451) 155

 

COURTS - Appeals - Extension of time - Conditions - For exercise of court’s discretion - Applicant must disclose in the supporting affidavit - Good and substantial reason for delay - And an arguable ground (H1) Lafferi Nig. Ltd. v. Nal Merchant Bank Plc. (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1459; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1478) 64

 

COURTS - Appeals - Extension of time - Reasons - Exception - Where ground complains of absence of jurisdiction - Court would no longer consider the reasons adduced for the delay necessary (H4) Adigwe v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1381; (2015) 18 NWLR (Pt.1490) 105

 

COURTS - Appeals - Filing - Payment of fees - Where inadequate fees are paid - Court can order for the short fall to be paid - As the omission does not rob the court of its jurisdiction (H5) Ogwe v. Inspector General Police (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 499; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1459) 505

 

COURTS - Appeals - Filing fees - Inadequacy of - Remedy - Where there is insufficient filing fee on document placed before the registry - Court should direct that such shortfall be remedied (H11) S.P.D.C. Nig. Ltd. v. Agbara (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3707; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1496) 353

 

COURTS - Appeals - Finding - Failure to appeal - As there is no further appeal to SC against the order made by CA - Dismissing appellant’s cross appeal - The finding is binding on all the parties (H7) Kayih v. Yilbuk (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 625; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 26

 

COURTS - Appeals - Findings - Failure of appellant to raise ground against CA’s reliance on doctrine of necessity - In relocating the Tribunal - Is deemed to be an endorsement of stance of the court (H7) Nyesom v. Peterside (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3361; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1492) 71

 

COURTS - Appeals - Findings - Failure to appeal - Appellant who did not appeal against the finding by CA - Cannot be heard to complain that - The court did not take decision on issue of discretion (H5) Daniel v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1757; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 119

 

COURTS - Appeals - Findings of fact - Based on demeanour is an exclusive prerogative of trial court - Which appellate courts do not make the habit of interfering with (H6) FRN v. Dairo (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 211; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1454) 141

 

COURTS - Appeals - Fresh issue - Leave - Fresh issue of impersonation introduced without compliance with the rules - Was properly struck out by the tribunal and rightly affirmed by CA (H8) APC v. PDP (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1179; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1481) 1

 

COURTS - Appeals - Fresh issue - Leave - Having neither canvassed the relief at CA - Nor sought and obtained leave to raise same in SC - Appellant cannot be heard on the issue (H2) Odom v. PDP (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 677; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1456) 527

 

COURTS - Appeals ­- Fresh issue - Leave - Issue of whether the narcotic drug comes within meaning of NDLEA Act s. 11(c)(d) was not before CA - And cannot be raised in SC for the first time without leave (H2) Blessing v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1653; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 1

 

COURTS - Appeals - Fresh issue - Leave - Substantial issue not raised in lower court - Is not allowed to be raised for the first time in Supreme Court - Except with leave of the court (H6) Ibrahim v. Lawal (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 1949; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 490

 

COURTS - Appeals - Fresh issue - Party raising an issue for the first time must do so by leave of court - Save where the issue is on jurisdiction - Which is the foundation of adjudication (H4) Sakati v. Bako (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2085; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1480) 531

 

COURTS - Appeals - Fresh issues - Leave - Issues not considered and pronounced on by trial court - Are fresh issues that can only be heard by appellate court - After leave of the court is obtained (H1) Compagnie Generale De Geopysique Nig. Ltd. v. Aminu (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 793; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1459) 577

 

COURTS - Appeals - Ground - Issue - Formulation - Obiter dictum - The comment by CA is obiter dictum - Which cannot be the basis for raising ground of appeal - From which an issue can be framed (H3) APC v. PDP (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1179; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1481) 1

 

COURTS - Appeals - Ground - Leave - Appellants do not require leave to raise a ground - That the CA granted the injunction it did - When issue of jurisdiction has not been settled - As this is a question of law (H1) Soludo v. Osigbo (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2983; (2009) 18 NWLR (Pt.1173) 290

 

COURTS - Appeals - Grounds - Competence of - By virtue of Constitution 1999 s. 233(2)(a) - Appeal will lie as of right to SC on ground 7 - Which questions the jurisdiction of CA to determine the suit (H3) Iragbiji v. Oyewole (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3099; (2013) 13 NWLR (Pt.1372) 566

 

COURTS - Appeals - Hearing notice - Fair hearing - CA rightly proceeded with the matter - Having established that appellant was duly served but chose to be absent - Hence he cannot complain of breach of fair hearing (H1) Ogwe v. Inspector General Police (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 499; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1459) 505

 

COURTS - Appeals - Interested party - Leave - Failure to obtain - Appellants being interested parties ought to seek leave to appeal - And having failed to do so - CA rightly struck out the appeal as incompetent (H4) Assams v. Ararume (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3629; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1493) 368

 

COURTS - Appeals - Issue - Formulation by court - Appellant’s issue 1 and the issue 2 formulated by Court of Appeal are the same - The court simply added some words to state the obvious (H5) Kabirikim v. Emefor (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2907; (2009) 14 NWLR (Pt.1162) 602

 

COURTS - Appeals - Issues - Raising of - Where court advances reasons for not dealing with an issue - An aggrieved person can raise any or all the reasons given by the court - As an issue on appeal (H5) Sakati v. Bako (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2085; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1480) 531

 

COURTS - Appeals - Judicial precedent - Upholding of - CA ought to be bound by its previous decision and that of SC - In respect of the issue the appeal raises (H3) Ogwe v. Inspector General Police (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 499; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1459) 505

 

COURTS - Appeals - Jurisdiction - Court of Appeal - Jurisdiction of the court to entertain appeals is statutorily derived - And it is equally guided by its Rules (H1) Ikechukwu v. FRN (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 845; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 1

 

COURTS - Appeals - Jurisdiction - Having struck out appellants’ appeal for being incompetent - CA ceased to have jurisdiction over the matter before it (H5) Ihedioha v. Okorocha (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3287; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1492) 147

 

COURTS - Appeals - Jurisdiction - Issues - Although CA has a duty to pronounce on all issues before it - But where the court decides that it lacks jurisdiction - It is unnecessary to consider other issues (H4) Ikechukwu v. FRN (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 845; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 1

 

COURTS - Appeals - Locus standi - Res judicata - Appellant is stopped per rem judicatam - From bringing same case before the court - As he cannot question conduct of election - In which he did not participate (H5) Sylva v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1067; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1486) 576

 

COURTS - Appeals - Misuse of - Order to be made - Where originating summons was used in contentious matter - Appellate court is not to go into the merits - But should strike out the matter (H2) Adeyelu II v. Oyewunmi (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2689

 

COURTS - Appeals - Notice - Competence of - It is the foundation of every appeal - Hence any defect therein will render the whole appeal incompetent - And appellate court will lack jurisdiction to entertain it (H1) Ikuepenikan v. State (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1273; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1465) 518

 

COURTS - Appeals - Notice - Filing - Non compliance with CA Rules O. 3 r. 2(1) - As to the venue to file appeal - Would only confer right to ask the court - To pronounce the notice void (H1) Obi v. INEC (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2773; (2009) 18 NWLR (Pt.1172) 215

 

COURTS - Appeals - Notice of - Filing - Proper venue - Party aggrieved by decision of any HC - Shall file his notice in registry of the trial court not that of CA - Save after compilation and transmission of record (H4) S.P.D.C. Nig. Ltd. v. Agbara (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3707; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1496) 353

 

COURTS - Appeals - Notice of - Inadequate filing fees - Payment of inadequate filing fees can only make a process irregular - And not capable of affecting jurisdiction of the court (H7) S.P.D.C. Nig. Ltd. v. Agbara (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3707; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1496) 353

 

COURTS - Appeals - Purpose of - It is to find out whether on the state of pleadings, evidence and applicable law - The lower court came to right decision - In relation to reliefs canvassed in the matter (H1) Odom v. PDP (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 677; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1456) 527

 

COURTS - Appeals - Record - Binding nature of - Appellate court has no jurisdiction to read into record what it does not contain - As court must read and apply exact content of the record without more (H2) Ogwe v. Inspector General Police (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 499; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1459) 505

 

COURTS - Appeals - Success of - Basis - Where appellant fails to satisfy appellate court - That lower court was wrong in its application of facts to applicable law - His appeal will fail (H3) Omisore v. Aregbesola (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1821; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1482) 205

 

COURTS - Applications - Joint hearing - The procedure adopted by trial judge in hearing all applications jointly - Amounts to procedural expediency - Clearly within His Lordship’s powers (H6) Assams v. Ararume (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3629; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1493) 368

 

COURTS - Armed robbery - Proof - Failure in PW testimony - Non direction by trial court on effect of failure to name appellant - Occasioned a miscarriage of justice (H5) Ibrahim v. State (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 995; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1469) 164

 

COURTS - Charges - Arraignment - Requirement - Charge must be read and explained to accused in language he understands - And to the satisfaction of court - Before he is called upon to plead thereto (H1) Daniel v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1757; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 119

 

COURTS - Charges - Plea - Objection - Where accused pleads to charge before the court without objection - It is presupposed that he understood the charge preferred against him (H3) Daniel v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1757; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 119

 

COURTS - Charges - Plea - Presumption of regularity - Where charge is read to accused and his plea is taken and recorded - Presumption is that court is satisfied that charge was explained to accused (H2) Daniel v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1757; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 119

 

COURTS - Chieftaincy matters - Evidence - Unchallenged - Evidence of series of letters of complaint made without a response - Is a matter court is enjoined to act on as unchallenged evidence (H5) Kayih v. Yilbuk (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 625; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 26

 

COURTS - Chieftaincy matters - Jurisdiction - Condition for the court to assume jurisdiction in the matter - Exists with the obvious complaints lodged which received no response (H6) Kayih v. Yilbuk (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 625; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 26

 

COURTS - Competence - Composition of court - Where there is defect in membership - Court is not properly constituted and it lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate - And any decision it reached is a nullity (H2) MPPP v. INEC (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3335

 

COURTS - Confession - Conflicting versions - Where accused makes two statements voluntarily - Trial Judge will be right to take the one less favourable to the accused (H1) Edoko v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 379; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1465) 454

 

COURTS - Confession - Test of - Once accused retracts his confession - Court is expected to inter alia examine if there is anything outside the confession - To show that it is true (H8) Okanlawon v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2431; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 445

 

COURTS - Constitution - Supremacy - State HC - Jurisdiction - In view of the supremacy of the Constitution - Any law which tends to limit jurisdiction of the court - Is null and void (H3) Kayih v. Yilbuk (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 625; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 26

 

COURTS - Contracts - Breach - Damages - Court is concerned with damages which are natural and probable consequences of the breach - Or damages within the contemplation of parties (H1) Agu v. General Oil Ltd. (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1155; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1488) 327

 

COURTS - Contracts - Breach - Speculative damages - Court should not consider damages which are speculative - Unless they are specifically provided for - By express terms of the contract (H2) Agu v. General Oil Ltd. (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1155; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1488) 327

 

COURTS - Contracts - Jurisdiction - As the action is on simple contract - FHC cannot arrogate itself jurisdiction - Hence CA wrongfully held that trial court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the action (H4) Wema Securities & Finance Plc. v. Nig. Agric. Insu. Corp. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2557; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 93

 

COURTS - Conviction - Confession - Court can convict accused on his confession - And such confession does not require corroboration - If it meets the requirements of the law (H3) Alo v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 331; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1464) 238

 

COURTS - Conviction - Confession - Court can convict on confession alone - Where it is unequivocal as to guilt of accused - Hence retraction of same will not vitiate its admission (H5) Blessing v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1653; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 1

 

COURTS - Conviction - Confession - Retraction - Court can convict on a retracted statement - But it is desirable to find external evidence that makes it probable that the confession was true (H2) Busari v. State (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 53; (2015) 5 NWLR (Pt.1452) 343

 

COURTS - Crime - Trial - Venue - As the key witnesses and appellant are resident within jurisdiction of the trial court - To move the trial to another location is an exercise in forum shopping (H4) Dariye v. FRN (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 529; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1467) 325

 

COURTS - Cross examination - Objective - The main aim is to damage the case of prosecution - And to make court believe that accused did not commit the offence (H2) Jua v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2873; (2010) 4 NWLR (Pt.1184) 217

 

COURTS - Customary courts - Parties - To ascertain capacity in which a party initiates action in the court - The whole proceedings must be looked into - And broad interpretation placed on the judgment (H2) Jitte v. Okpulor (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3649; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1497) 542

 

COURTS - Damages - Award - Basis - Amount of damages awarded by trial court - Is based on evidence before the court - And where there is no evidence in support - The claim would be dismissed (H10) CBN v. Okojie (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2149; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1479) 231

 

COURTS - Damages - Award - Interference - Appellate court does not interfere with award - Save where trial court acted under a mistake of law - Or the amount awarded is either ridiculously low or high (H5) British Airways v. Atoyebi (2015) 11 KLR (pt. 374) 3425; (2014) 13 NWLR (Pt.1424) 253

 

COURTS - Damages - Award - Interference - Damages are awarded at the discretion of trial Judge - And appeal court does not interfere unless - The exercise is tainted with irregularity (H11) CBN v. Okojie (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2149; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1479) 231

 

COURTS - Decision - Functus officio - Registrar’s statement on issue of service of processes - Is not a decision of CA for which it became functus officio and could not reopen it (H1) Ihedioha v. Okorocha (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3287; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1492) 147

 

COURTS - Discretion - Exercise of - Basis - Exercise of discretion in one case may guide a court - But cannot bind another court in its exercise of discretion - As such exercise depends on the peculiar facts of a given case (H2) Amaechi v. Omehia (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3069; (2013) 16 NWLR (Pt.1381) 417

 

COURTS - Discretion - Exercise of - Condition - Person seeking indulgence of court must place before it - Sufficient materials in order to assist court exercise its discretion in his favour (H2) Yar’adua v. CPC (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2989

 

COURTS - Discretion - Exercise of - Conditions - Where applicant prays for exercise of discretion - He must place before court sufficient materials - To be relied upon in granting his application (H2) Adigwe v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1381; (2015) 18 NWLR (Pt.1490) 105

 

COURTS - Document - Evaluation - A Judge is not permitted to embark on inquisitorial examination of documents outside court room - Or to act on what he discovered in same - Without evidence in support (H5) Omisore v. Aregbesola (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1821; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1482) 205

 

COURTS - Documents - Amendment - Commencement - Amendment takes effect not from the date it is ordered by court - But from the date of the original document (H2) Akpamgbo-Okadigbo v. Chidi (1) (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 953; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 124

 

COURTS - Election petitions - Ground - Omoworare v. Omisore - Appellant having based its petition on impeachment of 2nd respondent - Decision of CA in the case law was rightly applied (H4) APC v. PDP (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1179; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1481) 1

 

COURTS - Election petitions - Gubernatorial - Final court - Constitution 1999 s. 246 deprives SC of jurisdiction - To deal with gubernatorial election petition - As CA is the final court (H1) Sha’aban v. Sambo (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2975; (2010) 19 NWLR (Pt.1226) 353

 

COURTS - Election petitions - Preelection - Jurisdiction - FHC - Concurrent jurisdiction conferred on FHC by Evidence Act in pre & post election matters - Is in addition to its exclusive jurisdiction in s. 251 of Constitution 1999 (H4) Lokpobiri v. Ogola (2015) 11 KLR (pt. 374) 3461; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 328

 

COURTS - Elections - Action - Mandatory injunction - 1st to 5th respondents’ quest for the injunction in respect of election matter - Filed at HC instead of election tribunal - Is not maintainable in law (H3) Akpamgbo-Okadigbo v. Chidi (2) (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 759; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 124

 

COURTS - Elections - Appeals - Relief - Consideration of appellant’s claim in view of his assertion in a primary he never participated in - Is a worthless exercise - Hence the CA decision is unassailable (H3) Daniel v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 809; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1463) 113

 

COURTS - Elections - Preelection - Jurisdiction - Preelection matter filed prior to election subsists - And HC in which it was so instituted continues to have jurisdiction - Even after conduct of the election (H1) Wambai v. Donatus (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3163; (2014) 14 NWLR (Pt.1427) 223

 

COURTS - Elections - Preelection - Jurisdiction - Where there is complaint about conduct of primaries - Court can by Electoral Act s. 87(9) - Examine if the election complied with the Act and constitution of the political party (H1) Akpamgbo-Okadigbo v. Chidi (1) (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 953; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 124

 

COURTS - Elections - Primary election - Where complaint is on non compliance with political party’s guidelines in the election - An aspirant may approach FHC or State HC for redress (H4) James v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 863; (2015) 12 NWLR (Pt.1474) 538

 

COURTS - Evidence - Admissibility of - Court is expected to admit and act on legal evidence - But where inadmissible evidence is admitted - Court is not to act upon it but discountenance same (H4) Unity Life & Fire Insurance Ltd. v. Int’l Bank of W. Africa (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2821; (2001) 7 NWLR (Pt.713) 610

 

COURTS - Evidence - Admissibility of - Objection - Where inadmissible evidence is tendered - And party or counsel on other side fails to object - Court in civil cases may and in criminal cases must reject such evidence (H7) Unity Life & Fire Insurance Ltd. v. Int’l Bank of W. Africa (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2821; (2001) 7 NWLR (Pt.713) 610

 

COURTS - Evidence - Confession - Retraction - The fact that accused has retracted a confession - Does not mean that court cannot act and rely on same - To convict him (H2) State v. Gwan (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2469; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1477) 600

 

COURTS - Evidence - Consent document - Admissibility - Reliance is not totally placed on document put in evidence by consent - As court must still consider the weight to be attached to same (H12) Kayih v. Yilbuk (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 625; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 26

 

COURTS - Evidence - Contradiction - Weight - Where there are material contradictions - Court is enjoined to reject the entire evidence - As it cannot pick and choose which of the conflicting versions to follow (H15) Kayih v. Yilbuk (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 625; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 26

 

COURTS - Evidence - Crime - Admission - Relevancy - Court in trial proceedings will admit in evidence - Only material facts for the just determination of the case before it (H5) Ali v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1611; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 1

 

COURTS - Evidence - Crime - Evaluation - Correctness of - Evaluation of the trial Judge is unassailable as there is nothing to show perversity - Hence Supreme Court will not interfere (H4) Busari v. State (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 53; (2015) 5 NWLR (Pt.1452) 343

 

COURTS - Evidence - Crime - Identification - Witness fixing accused at crime scene - Must mention name of accused at earliest opportunity time to police - Otherwise court will be cautious in accepting his evidence (H1) Idemudia v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2369; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1488) 375

 

COURTS - Evidence - Evaluation - And ascription of probative value to evidence - Are within the exclusive preserve of trial court - But where it relates to a document - Such rights are not exclusive to the court (H1) Ogundalu v. Macjob (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1021; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1460) 96

 

COURTS - Evidence - Evaluation - Ascription of credibility to evidence of witnesses is within power of trial court - Which appellate courts cannot interfere with (H4) Omisore v. Aregbesola (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1821; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1482) 205

 

COURTS - Evidence - Evaluation - Credibility of witness is a matter for trial court - And once conviction is based on credible evidence of single witness - The same shall not be open to question (H7) Ali v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1611; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 1

 

COURTS - Evidence - Inadmissible evidence - Rejection of - Even where no objection is raised to its admission - Court is bound to reject inadmissible evidence - In the interest of justice (H1) Zubairu v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1919; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1486) 504

 

COURTS - Evidence - Inconsistency rule - Application - Udo v. Queen - Inconsistency rule does not apply - To the previous confessions of an accused and his evidence in court (H3) Akinlolu v. State (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3601; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1497) 503

 

COURTS - Evidence - Material facts - Contradictions in - Where conflicts exist in material facts - The same must be explained to satisfaction of court - Otherwise court cannot speculate on explanations not supported by evidence (H4) Princewill v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2801; (1994) 6 NWLR (Pt.353) 703

 

COURTS - Evidence - Review of - Court reviews a part of evidence complained of through ground of appeal - Properly filed and challenging the evidence (H5) Alo v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 331; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1464) 238

 

COURTS - Evidence - Tainted witness - As no attempt was made to show the falsity of trial court’s findings - CA affirmation that PW2 is not to be classified as tainted witness cannot be faulted (H3) Akinlolu v. State (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3601; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1497) 503

 

COURTS - Evidence - Tainted witness - Where a witness is said to be tainted - Court must warn itself before admitting his evidence - And if he is an accomplice - His evidence requires corroboration (H2) Pius v. State (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1053; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1459) 628

 

COURTS - Fair Hearing - Breach - Allegation of - A party must be heard before case against him is determined - And once he can satisfy court that his right to fair hearing was infringed - He is entitled to remedy (H5) Assams v. Ararume (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3629; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1493) 368

 

COURTS - Fair hearing - Breach - Effect - Decision of CA arising from the issue raised suo motu - And without hearing the parties is a nullity - For being a breach of constitutional right to fair hearing (H2) Ominiyi v. Alabi (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 711; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1456) 572

 

COURTS - Fair hearing - Motions - Consideration of - All applications properly brought before court must be heard - As any breach will nullify the proceedings (H2) Odedo v. PDP (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2007

 

COURTS - Federal High Court - Jurisdiction - Extent of - Exclusive jurisdiction of the court is tied to the listed items - And to others as may be conferred upon it by Act of the National Assembly (H3) Wema Securities & Finance Plc. v. Nig. Agric. Insu. Corp. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2557; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 93

 

COURTS - Federal High Court - Jurisdiction - In considering issue of its jurisdiction - Status of the parties and subject matter of the claim must be looked at (H5) Wema Securities & Finance Plc. v. Nig. Agric. Insu. Corp. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2557; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 93

 

COURTS - Fraud - Lifting the veil - Court will not allow a party to use its company as cover to defraud an innocent person - Who entered into lawful contract with it (H2) Oyebanji v. State (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2255; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1479) 270

 

COURTS - Fundamental rights - Enforcement - Right of action accrued to respondent to seek redress in FHC - Over malicious prosecution by appellants’ police officers (H1) CBN v. Okojie (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2149; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1479) 231

 

COURTS - Identification - Proof - Whenever court is faced with evidence of identification - It must ensure and be satisfied that accused before it - Was the person who committed the offence (H2) Okanlawon v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2431; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 445

 

COURTS - Identification parade - Evidence - Weight - To guard against cases of mistaken identity - Court must consider circumstances in which eye witness saw suspect - Length of time witness saw suspect (H5) Sale v. State (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3679; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 392

 

COURTS - Identification parade - Issue - Determination of - Identification of accused is only relevant - Where same is an issue before trial court - Otherwise court is not expected to dwell on it (H1) Fabiyi v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2349; (2015) 18 NWLR (Pt.1490) 80

 

COURTS - Insurance - Claim - Jurisdiction - To entertain claim based on simple contract of insurance - Is not vested exclusively on FHC - Rather the jurisdiction is vested on High Courts of the States (H2) Sun Insu. Nig. Plc. v. Umez Eng. Const. Co Ltd. (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2319; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1471) 576

 

COURTS - Issue - Suo motu raising - Court is not entitled to raise an issue suo motu - And decide on it without affording parties opportunity to be heard (H1) Ominiyi v. Alabi (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 711; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1456) 572

 

COURTS - Issues - Suo motu raising - Court can raise issue suo motu in the interest of justice - But it must invite parties to address it on such issue - Before basing its decision thereupon (H3) Odedo v. PDP (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2007

 

COURTS - Issues - Suo motu raising - Court should not raise a point suo motu - And proceed to resolve same without hearing the parties - Especially party that will be adversely affected by the issue (H2) Olaolu v. Federal Republic of Nigeria (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1797

 

COURTS - Judgments - Declaratory judgment - Meaning - Is one that proclaims existence of legal relationship - But does not contain any order which may be enforced (H1) Iragbiji v. Oyewole (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3099; (2013) 13 NWLR (Pt.1372) 566

 

COURTS - Judgments - Executory judgment - Meaning - Is one that states the respective rights of parties - And also orders defendant to act in a particular way - Or refrain from interfering with plaintiff’s rights (H2) Iragbiji v. Oyewole (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3099; (2013) 13 NWLR (Pt.1372) 566

 

COURTS - Judgments - Setting aside - Court can set aside its previous decision in cases of lack of jurisdiction - Or fraud which must be connected to everything adjudicated upon (H1) Michael v. Bank of the North (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1711; (2015) 12 NWLR (Pt.1473) 370

 

COURTS - Judgments - Validity - CA judgment is in breach of Constitution 1999 s. 285(8) - As a judgment must show clear resolution of all issues - And end with ultimate verdict flowing from facts and law (H1) CPC v. Yuguda (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2859; (2013) 7 NWLR (Pt.1354) 450

 

COURTS - Judicial power - Entitlement to - For a person to be entitled to invoke judicial power - He must show that his personal interest will be or has been adversely affected (H1) Yar’adua v. CPC (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2989

 

COURTS - Judicial precedents - Case law - Distinction - CA rightly refused to be bound by decision in Ibori v. Ogboru and Ogboru v. PCA - In view of disparities in their facts with that of present case (H8) Nyesom v. Peterside (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3361; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1492) 71

 

COURTS - Jurisdiction - Absence of - Effect - Court either has jurisdiction to make certain orders or it does not - Where it lacks jurisdiction - Its pronouncement is of no legal effect (H4) Lafferi Nig. Ltd. v. Nal Merchant Bank Plc. (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1459; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1478) 64

 

COURTS - Jurisdiction - Absence of - Once trial court lacks jurisdiction on a matter - Court of Appeal will have no jurisdiction to hear and determine the matter on the merit (H4) Wambai v. Donatus (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3163; (2014) 14 NWLR (Pt.1427) 223

 

COURTS - Jurisdiction - Action ­- Striking out - Where court has no jurisdiction to determine a case - It has no jurisdiction to dismiss it - It should strike out the matter (H3) Sylva v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1067; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1486) 576

 

COURTS - Jurisdiction - Determination - Court has jurisdiction to determine whether or not it has jurisdiction over a matter - And what it says may be profound - But not made per incuriam (H4) Sylva v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1067; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1486) 576

 

COURTS - Jurisdiction - Exclusive & concurrent jurisdiction - Distinction - Whereas the exclusive jurisdiction of a court is peculiar to it - Concurrent jurisdiction is common to two or more courts (H2) Lokpobiri v. Ogola (2015) 11 KLR (pt. 374) 3461; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 328

 

COURTS - Jurisdiction - Exercise of - Conditions - The subject matter of the case must be within jurisdiction of the court - And no feature in the case must prevent court from exercising its jurisdiction (H3) Sun Insu. Nig. Plc. v. Umez Eng. Const. Co Ltd. (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2319; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1471) 576

 

COURTS - Jurisdiction - FHC - Criminal jurisdiction of - Is exercisable in the division within which offence was committed - But it can assume jurisdiction following inter alia an order of transfer (H1) Roda v. FRN (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 121; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1468) 427

 

COURTS - Jurisdiction - FHC - Decision of Abuja division of the court to try offence that occurred in Kano - Which bears no relationship with the offence in Abuja - Is perverse (H4) Roda v. FRN (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 121; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1468) 427

 

COURTS - Jurisdiction - Fundamental nature of - Court should first determine issue of jurisdiction - Before embarking on any proceeding for hearing on the merit (H4) Sun Insu. Nig. Plc. v. Umez Eng. Const. Co Ltd. (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2319; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1471) 576

 

COURTS - Jurisdiction - Fundamentality of - It is a question of law that can be raised as fresh issue on appeal even in SC - And there is no need for leave before it is properly raised (H1) MPPP v. INEC (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3335

 

COURTS - Jurisdiction - Fundamentality of - Jurisdiction goes to root of adjudication process - As where court lacks jurisdiction - Any decision it reached is a nullity (H1) Lokpobiri v. Ogola (2015) 11 KLR (pt. 374) 3461; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 328

 

COURTS - Jurisdiction - Issue - Time to raise - Challenge to jurisdiction of court can be raised at any stage of the trial - And even on appeal (H2) Omokhafe v. Esekhomo (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2783; (1993) 8 NWLR (Pt.309) 58

 

COURTS - Jurisdiction - Issue of - Being a threshold matter - Jurisdiction can be raised at any stage of the proceedings - By any party to a dispute or even by court suo motu (H4) Ibrahim v. Lawal (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 1949; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 490

 

COURTS - Jurisdiction - Privity of - Respondents had no ground to sue appellant under the lease agreement - As absence of locus standi deprived trial court of jurisdiction to entertain the matter (H2) Rebold Ind. Ltd. v. Magreola (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1349; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1461) 210

 

COURTS - Jurisdiction - Rules of court - Non compliance with - Court will not abandon its jurisdiction because of non compliance - As the rules should not be means of compromising right of appeal (H3) Odom v. PDP (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 677; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1456) 527

 

COURTS - Jurisdiction - Sources of - Jurisdiction is a matter of law and is statutorily conferred - And neither the court nor parties can confer jurisdiction (H7) Odom v. PDP (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 677; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1456) 527

 

COURTS - Jurisdiction - Sources of - No court can assume jurisdiction except it is statutorily endowed - As jurisdiction cannot be implied nor can it be conferred by agreement of parties (H5) Ibrahim v. Lawal (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 1949; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 490

 

COURTS - Jurisdiction of Election Tribunal and Court of Appeal in respect of election petitions - Is derived from the Constitution 1999 (as amended) (H4) Dankwambo v. Abubakar (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3237; (2016) 2 NWLR (Pt.1495) 157

 

COURTS - Justice - Upholding of - Court being an impartial arbitrator - Must always consider both sides of a case before coming to a conclusion - As to do otherwise will result in grave injustice (H4) Kabirikim v. Emefor (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2907; (2009) 14 NWLR (Pt.1162) 602

 

COURTS - Land law - Appeals - Court - Findings - As the trial court was constituted by men better placed to appreciate the matter - Its findings that respondent rightly proved his claim cannot be faulted (H3) Jitte v. Okpulor (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3649; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1497) 542

 

COURTS - Land law - Appeals - Variation order - CA rightly varied the decision of the trial customary court - Rather than reversing same - For this was done in the general interest of the family (H5) Jitte v. Okpulor (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3649; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1497) 542

 

COURTS - Land law - Lease - Forfeiture - Condition - Forfeiture on grounds of misconduct can only be ordered to determine a valid lease - And as there is no valid lease - The courts below wrongfully made the order (H5) Ogundalu v. Macjob (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1021; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1460) 96

 

COURTS - Land law - Pleadings ­- Binding nature of - A Judge should not give evidence on identity of land - As court should not set up for parties - A case different from the one in their pleadings (H5) Addah v. Ubandawaki (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 183; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1458) 325

 

COURTS - Land law - Reliefs - Extent of - Respondent did not only require the court to grant him declaration to title - He also claimed for disturbance of his possessory right (H4) Jitte v. Okpulor (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3649; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1497) 542

 

COURTS - Land law - Title - Smaller land - Court may grant declaration over smaller area than that claimed - If the evidence before the court justifies it (H4) Yakubu v. Jauroyel (2015) 11 KLR (pt. 374) 3547; (2014) 11 NWLR (Pt.1418) 205

 

COURTS - Legal practitioners - Address - Weight - Counsel’s address assists the court but it is not evidence - As a case is won on credible evidence - And failure to address will not cause miscarriage of justice (H1) Mohammad v. State (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 101

 

COURTS - Legal practitioners - Mistake - Court does not punish litigant because of error committed by his counsel - Save it can be shown that the litigant was party to the commission of the error (H12) S.P.D.C. Nig. Ltd. v. Agbara (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3707; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1496) 353

 

COURTS - Legislation - Interpretation - Justice - Court does not read provisions of enactment in a way to deny litigant access to justice - As court is guided by its rule in conduct of its business (H10) S.P.D.C. Nig. Ltd. v. Agbara (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3707; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1496) 353

 

COURTS - Locus standi - Fundamentality of - It is the legal capacity to institute proceedings in court - And if plaintiff does not have locus standi - Court would have no jurisdiction to entertain the suit (H4) Daniel v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 809; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1463) 113

 

COURTS - Maritime law - Fishing - Right of - Is limited to the portion within the borders of the communities - Hence miscarriage of justice was not occasioned by trial court’s interpretation of respondents’ claim (H1) Sakati v. Bako (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2085; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1480) 531

 

COURTS - Maritime law - Judgment - Appeal - As there was no appeal against the finding of trial court - Issue as to who was responsible for appellants’ detention aboard the ship is settled (H1) Oleksandr v. Lonestar Drilling Co. Ltd. (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1301; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1464) 337

 

COURTS - Maritime law - Oil spillage - Negligence - Rylands v. Fletcher - In respect of damages resulting from escape of oil waste - CA’s affirmation of trial court on res ipsa loquitur - And the rule in the case law cannot be faulted (H4) SPDC Nig. Ltd. v. Anaro (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2281; (2015) 12 NWLR (Pt.1472) 122

 

COURTS - Murder - Absence of accused - In the absence of allocutus before death sentence on appellant - Presumption is that he was not present in court - Which omission vitiated the trial (H2) Mohammad v. State (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 101

 

COURTS - Murder - Confession - Veracity of - From appellant’s positive account - Lower courts rightly resolved fact of the death of deceased - And that it was appellant’s gruesome act that caused it (H2) Iliyasu v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 559; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1469) 26

 

COURTS - Murder - Evidence - Credibility of - Tainted witness - PW1 was not tainted witness but a witness of truth - Whose evidence was properly evaluated by trial court and affirmed by CA (H10) Ali v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1611; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 1

 

COURTS - Murder - Intention - Dangerous weapon - Where such weapon was used - Court will infer that death was a probable - And not just a likely consequence of accused act (H3) Iliyasu v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 559; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1469) 26

 

COURTS - Orders - Election - Nomination - Status quo - CA ought to have given an order - Which confines the parties to state of things as it was before litigation started (H2) Soludo v. Osigbo (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2983; (2009) 18 NWLR (Pt.1173) 290

 

COURTS - Parties - Joinder of - Application for - Delay - Applicants seeking to be joined in the suit between the two sets of respondents - Ought to have promptly joined the action at trial court (H3) Yar’adua v. CPC (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2989

 

COURTS - Parties - Joinder of - Is ordered where the party is aggrieved - To avoid multiplicity of suits - Completely deal with the suit - Ensure fair hearing and to avoid loss of jurisdiction (H4) Akpamgbo-Okadigbo v. Chidi (1) (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 953; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 124

 

COURTS - Pleadings - Amendment - Lower courts rightly refused the amendment sought - As there was lack of good faith - With the result of overreaching respondent (H1) Compagnie Gen. De Geo. Nig. Ltd. v. Idorenyin (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1435; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 149

 

COURTS - Pleadings - Binding nature - In view of the state of the pleadings and evidence adduced - CA rightly held that allegation relating to murder was baseless - And that trial court’s finding was perverse (H9) Kayih v. Yilbuk (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 625; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 26

 

COURTS - Pleadings - Binding nature of - Evidence led by a party which conflicts with his pleadings - Goes to no issue and should be discountenanced - As court and parties are bound by the pleadings (H5) Odom v. PDP (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 677; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1456) 527

 

COURTS - Pleadings - Evidence - Contradictions - Parties and courts are bound by pleadings - And any evidence at variance with pleadings must be disregarded by court (H6) Addah v. Ubandawaki (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 183; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1458) 325

 

COURTS - Pleadings - Issues - Evidence - Court proceeds on trial on issues in pleadings - But where party fails to call evidence in support of his issues - Court may resolve such issues against the defaulting party (H8) Unity Life & Fire Insurance Ltd. v. Int’l Bank of W. Africa (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2821; (2001) 7 NWLR (Pt.713) 610

 

COURTS - Powers - Purpose of - Inherent powers of court are products of Constitution and court itself - In its quest for substantial justice - Thereby ensuring that streams of justice remain pure (H1) Enterprise Bank Ltd v. Aroso (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1783; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1476) 306

 

COURTS - Procedure - Irregularity in - Waiver - Where party at trial consented to a procedure which is merely wrong - It is late to complain against same on appeal - Simply because he lost the case (H6) Unity Life & Fire Insurance Ltd. v. Int’l Bank of W. Africa (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2821; (2001) 7 NWLR (Pt.713) 610

 

COURTS - Processes - Service - Jurisdiction - Where service is needed - Failure to effect same renders the proceedings void - As no court has jurisdiction where any of the parties was not served (H3) Compagnie Generale De Geopysique Nig. Ltd. v. Aminu (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 793; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1459) 577

 

COURTS - Records - Regularity of - Records of court are presumed to be correct - Until they are successfully impugned (H2) Nobis-Elendu v. INEC (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 1981; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1485) 197

 

COURTS - Res judicata - Plea - Condition - Party relying on the plea must establish inter alia that the parties and subject matter are the same - That the decision is valid and final - And that court has jurisdiction (H1) Ogbolosingha v. Bayelsa S.I.E.C. (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 461; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1455) 311

 

COURTS - Rules - Non compliance - Effect - Every non compliance does not vitiate proceedings - But where court is robbed of jurisdiction - Processes and proceedings must be set aside (H3) Ihedioha v. Okorocha (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3287; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1492) 147

 

COURTS - Rules of - Compliance with - The rules are to be obeyed - And in the event of non compliance which is not explained - Court must not grant any indulgence (H4) Ifeanyichukwu Trad. Invest. Ven. Ltd. v. Onyesom Comm. Bank (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2183; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1487) 1

 

COURTS - State HC - Jurisdiction - Chieftaincy matter - Chiefs Law s. 3(2) that ousts unlimited jurisdiction of the court is null and void - Hence the court has jurisdiction to entertain the matter (H4) Kayih v. Yilbuk (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 625; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 26

 

COURTS - State HC - Jurisdiction - Constitution 1999 s. 272(1) - The court has unlimited jurisdiction to hear and determine - Any civil proceeding in which the existence of legal right is in issue (H2) Kayih v. Yilbuk (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 625; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 26

 

COURTS - Statutes - Interpretation - Literary rule - Courts must interpret the law within the context of its constitutive words - And refrain from seeking the meaning outside the clear words used by legislators (H6) Nobis-Elendu v. INEC (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 1981; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1485) 197

 

COURTS - Statutes - Interpretation - Principle - Provisions of statute must be read and construed together - Unless there is reason why a particular provision should be read independently (H4) Nobis-Elendu v. INEC (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 1981; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1485) 197

 

COURTS - Statutes - Interpretation - Rights of action - Courts must jealously guard their jurisdiction in protecting statutorily vested rights - If a provision of same statute appears to derogate from such rights (H5) Nobis-Elendu v. INEC (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 1981; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1485) 197

 

COURTS - Statutes - Limitation law - Effect - Such a statute takes away right to seek remedy in enforcement of the accrued right in court - Leaving the right bare and untouched (H1) ACN v. INEC (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3031; (2013) 13 NWLR (Pt.1370) 161

 

COURTS - Statutes - Public holidays - Public Holidays Act s. 1 recognizes only days listed in schedule to the Act as holidays - And courts are bound under Evidence Act 2011 s. 122(g) - To take judicial notice of such days (H5) Onyekwuluje v. Benue State Govt. (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2043; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 40

 

COURTS - Supreme Court - Appeals - Hearing - Limit - The court hears appeals from valid judgments of CA - And having held a part of CA’s decision as nullity - It has no jurisdiction to determine appellant’s issue (H3) Ominiyi v. Alabi (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 711; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1456) 572

 

COURTS - Supreme Court - Judgment - Binding nature of - Decisions of SC are binding on all courts - But where there are conflicts in the decisions - All courts are bound by its latest decision (H9) CBN v. Okojie (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2149; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1479) 231

 

COURTS - Trial - Prima facie case - CPC ss. 158 & 159 - As prima facie case is found established against appellants - The case is remitted to the trial Magistrate Court for conclusion (H2) Uzoagba v. COP (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3143

 

COURTS - Trial within trial - Conduct of - Having cast doubt on voluntariness of respondent’s statement - The trial Judge ought to have concluded the already started mini trial (H3) State v. Gwan (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2469; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1477) 600

 

COURTS - Tribunal - Supervision of - Application - For superior court to prevent tribunal from exceeding its jurisdiction - Applicant must present facts necessary to justify grant of the order sought (H4) Onyekwuluje v. Benue State Govt. (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2043; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 40

 

COURTS - Tribunals - Decision - Mistake in - Provided that the mistake in decision of a tribunal was committed within its jurisdiction - Superior court exercising supervisory jurisdiction - Cannot readily interfere (H3) Onyekwuluje v. Benue State Govt. (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2043; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 40

 

COURTS - Unchallenged evidence - Weight of - Where evidence given by party was not challenged by the opposite party - Court can act on such unchallenged evidence before it (H9) Unity Life & Fire Insurance Ltd. v. Int’l Bank of W. Africa (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2821; (2001) 7 NWLR (Pt.713) 610

 

COURTS - Undefended suits - Defendant must file notice of intention to defend the suit and affidavit in support - And once triable issue is disclosed - Suit is transferred to general list (H2) Ifeanyichukwu Trad. Invest. Ven. Ltd. v. Onyesom Comm. Bank (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2183; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1487) 1

 

COURTS - Undefended suits - Objective of - It enables court to deal summarily with plaintiff’s claim and enter quick judgment - Once there is no defence on merit - Thereby saving time and cost (H1) Ifeanyichukwu Trad. Invest. Ven. Ltd. v. Onyesom Comm. Bank (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2183; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1487) 1

 

CRIME - Actions - Allegation of - Proof - Evidence Act s. 135(1) - Allegation of fraud and conspiracy on which 1st appellant based his case - Has to be proved beyond reasonable doubt (H2) ACN v. INEC (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3031; (2013) 13 NWLR (Pt.1370) 161

 

CRIMINAL LAW - Fraud - Misappropriation of funds - Proof - Relationship between the parties is not merely contractual - As appellant’s unlawful appropriation of money paid to him - Involves a criminal act (H3) Oyebanji v. State (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2255; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1479) 270

 

CRIMINAL LAW - Self defence - Conditions CC s. 286 - For the defence to avail an accused - There must be an unlawful assault - Which was not provoked by the accused (H3) Edoko v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 379; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1465) 454

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Alibi - Investigation - Failure of the police to investigate the defence - As properly raised by appellant - Created serious lapse in the conduct of prosecuting the case (H3) Sani v. State (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2115; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1483) 522

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Accident - Dangerous driving - Proof - Exhibit C was prima facie evidence of dangerous driving - And a sufficient circumstantial evidence required to sustain a conviction (H1) Adeyemo v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1591; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1485) 311

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Accidents - Dangerous driving - Ingredients - Proof - Prosecution must prove that manner of driving was reckless - That the dangerous driving caused death - And that accident occurred on federal highway (H3) Adeyemo v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1591; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1485) 311

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Accidents - Defence - Challenge - Where the defence is raised - Prosecution must lead credible and admissible evidence - To convince court that the defence does not avail accused (H3) Maiyaki v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2735; (2008) 15 NWLR (Pt.1109) 173

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Accidents - Defence of - Condition - The defence does not avail appellant - As he failed to raise the defence timeously (H4) Maiyaki v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2735; (2008) 15 NWLR (Pt.1109) 173

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Accidents - Defence of - Weight - Where the defence is successfully set up - Appellant is relieved of criminal responsibility - As there is negation of any deliberate act on his part (H2) Maiyaki v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2735; (2008) 15 NWLR (Pt.1109) 173

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Accidents - Proof - Witnesses - Appellant was at liberty to call any of the surviving passengers - As witness to support his case - And should not dictate to prosecution how to carry out its job (H2) Adeyemo v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1591; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1485) 311

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Alibi - Defence - Conditions - For the defence to avail an accused - Such must be raised at the earliest opportunity - And with sufficient particulars to enable the police investigate it (H5) Mohammed v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 439

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Alibi - Defence - Conditions - For the defence to be entertained - It must be raised at earliest time - With sufficient particulars given of accused whereabouts - So as to enable police verify the claim (H10) Sale v. State (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3679; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 392

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Alibi - Defence - Failure to investigate - Failure of police to investigate the truth or otherwise of appellant’s alibi - Has cast doubt on prosecution’s case (H12) Sale v. State (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3679; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 392

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Alibi - Defence - Investigation - Prosecution must not investigate every alibi - But where accused story is capable of providing a defence - There is duty on prosecution to carry out investigation (H11) Sale v. State (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3679; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 392

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Alibi - Investigation of - Alibi must be definite as to time and whereabouts of accused - And once timeously raised - It must be thoroughly investigated by the police (H2) Idemudia v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2369; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1488) 375

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Alibi - Plea - Conditions - Accused must raise the defence at the earliest opportunity - Giving particulars of his whereabouts and those present with him - Otherwise it will not avail accused (H4) Iliyasu v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 559; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1469) 26

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Alibi - Plea - Validity - Appellant’s failure to raise the defence at earliest time nullifies same - As no burden shifted on the police to investigate (H3) Uche v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1731; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1470) 380

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Alibi - Proof - Accused is not obliged to prove his alibi - As it is enough if he supplies material facts - Sufficient for police to investigate the defence raised (H4) Idemudia v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2369; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1488) 375

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Appeals - Notice - Failure to sign - Notice must be signed personally by appellant in criminal appeals - Otherwise there is no competent appeal - And the court has no jurisdiction (H2) Ikuepenikan v. State (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1273; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1465) 518

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Appeals - Notice of - Signing - Iwunze v. FRN - Notice in criminal appeal must be personally signed by appellant - Save where circumstances warrant his counsel to discharge such duty for him (H3) Ikechukwu v. FRN (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 845; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 1

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Armed robbery - Conspiracy - Conviction - Based solely on testimony of PW2 cannot stand - As testimony of the witness is unreliable - Since he failed to identify appellant at earliest time (H5) Idemudia v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2369; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1488) 375

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Armed robbery - Evidence - Contradiction in - Weight - Conflict as regards date of the offence created material doubt - As to whether the incident actually occurred (H2) Sani v. State (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2115; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1483) 522

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Armed robbery - Identification parade - Conduct of - It is essential when there is dispute as to identity of accused - But where no dispute exists - There will be no need for the parade (H3) Okanlawon v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2431; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 445

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Armed robbery - Identification parade - Failure to conduct - Absence of conducting the parade - As well as failure to report the incident to Police timeously - Cast doubts on prosecution’s case (H3) Sale v. State (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3679; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 392

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Armed robbery - Ingredients - Conspiracy - Where ingredients of armed robbery have been established - Criminal conspiracy can properly be inferred (H2) Sale v. State (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3679; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 392

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Armed robbery - Ingredients - Proof - Beyond appellant’s confessional statement - Testimonies of PW1 & 5 establish that there was armed robbery - And that appellant was among the robbers (H3) Fabiyi v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2349; (2015) 18 NWLR (Pt.1490) 80

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Armed robbery - Ingredients - Proof - Prosecution needs to establish that there was robbery - That the robbery was armed robbery - And that appellant took part in the robbery (H4) Kolawole v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 411; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1460) 134

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Armed robbery - Ingredients - Proof - Prosecution must prove factual reality of a robbery - Participation of accused in the robbery - And that he was armed with firearms (H4) Ibrahim v. State (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 995; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1469) 164

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Armed robbery - Ingredients - Proof - Prosecution must prove that there was robbery - That the robbers were armed - And that accused was the armed robber or one of the armed robbers (H1) Okanlawon v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2431; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 445

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Armed robbery - Medical report - Admissibility - The report having been admitted without objection - And without asking for the presence of the maker - It is late to complain of his absence (H5) Kolawole v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 411; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1460) 134

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Armed robbery - Proof - Contradictions - Raised for appellant did not affect credibility of witnesses - Since he was arrested at the crime scene - Hence his involvement in the crime was rightly found (H2) Uche v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1731; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1470) 380

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Armed robbery - Proof - Failure in PW testimony - Non direction by trial court on effect of failure to name appellant - Occasioned a miscarriage of justice (H5) Ibrahim v. State (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 995; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1469) 164

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Armed robbery - Proof - Identification parade - Appellant cannot be said to have been identified by evidence of PW2 - As the trial court did not weigh the evidence - To prevent mistaken identity (H9) Sale v. State (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3679; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 392

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Armed robbery - Proof - Ingredients - Prosecution must prove that there was robbery - That the same was armed robbery - And that appellant was one of those who took part in the armed robbery (H1) Sale v. State (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3679; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 392

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Armed robbery - Proof - Prosecution failed to prove any ingredient of the offence - As there is no credible evidence to link appellant with the offence (H1) Sani v. State (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2115; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1483) 522

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Armed robbery - Proof - PW2 having failed to identify appellant as to fix him at the crime scene - Cannot be accorded the status of a credible witness - To sustain the proof required of prosecution (H3) Idemudia v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2369; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1488) 375

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Armed robbery - Stolen item - Recent possession - Presumption is that the person in possession is either the thief - Or received the property knowing it to have been stolen (H2) Kolawole v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 411; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1460) 134

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Arraignment - Validity of - There was no breach of requirements of arraignment - As appellant perfectly understood the charge that was read and explained to her (H1) Blessing v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1653; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 1

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Charges - Arraignment - Fair hearing - Reading and explanation of charge must be in language spoken by accused - So as to ensure his right to fair hearing enshrined in 1999 Constitution s. 36(6) (H3) Mohammed v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 439

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Charges - Arraignment - Requirement - Charge must be read and explained to accused in language he understands - And to the satisfaction of court - Before he is called upon to plead thereto (H1) Daniel v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1757; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 119

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Charges - Arraignment - Validity of - Once accused pleads to a charge without objection - It is presumed that he understands the charge preferred against him (H1) Olaolu v. Federal Republic of Nigeria (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1797

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Charges - Arraignment - Validity of - Since the charge contains 6 counts - It is unnecessary to read out and explain each count before plea is taken - Hence CPL s. 215 was fully complied with (H4) Mohammed v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 439

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Charges - Drafting - Omissions - Weight - Non material errors in stating particulars of offence are of no moment - Unless accused was in fact misled by such error (H2) Ibrahim v. State (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 995; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1469) 164

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Charges - Language of - Fair hearing - 1999 Constitution s. 6(a) - Every person charged with an offence - Shall be informed promptly in language he understands and in details - Of nature of the offence (H1) Ibrahim v. State (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 995; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1469) 164

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Charges - Objection to a charge for any formal defect - Shall be taken immediately after the charge had been read over to accused - Before he takes his plea (H3) Ibrahim v. State (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 995; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1469) 164

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Charges - Plea - Meaning of - To give a plea is for accused to formally respond to criminal charge - Either pleading guilty or not guilty (H4) Daniel v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1757; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 119

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Charges - Plea - Objection - Where accused pleads to charge before the court without objection - It is presupposed that he understood the charge preferred against him (H3) Daniel v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1757; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 119

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Charges - Plea - Presumption of regularity - Where charge is read to accused and his plea is taken and recorded - Presumption is that court is satisfied that charge was explained to accused (H2) Daniel v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1757; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 119

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Charges - Substantive charge and conspiracy - Proof - The approach is to deal with main charge before conspiracy - And failure to prove main charge does not make conviction for conspiracy inappropriate (H5) Okanlawon v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2431; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 445

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Circumstantial evidence - Weight - In absence of direct evidence - Conviction may be based on circumstantial evidence - Provided it points to the guilt of accused (H5) Iliyasu v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 559; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1469) 26

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Confession - Binding nature - Extent of - Where accused makes confession - He is not confessing for his accomplices - As the confession is only against him (H4) State v. Gwan (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2469; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1477) 600

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Confession - Co accused - Weight - Evidence of a co accused is admissible against the other - Where for instance it tallied with the statement of the other (H3) Kolawole v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 411; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1460) 134

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Confession - Conflicting versions - Where accused makes two statements voluntarily - Trial Judge will be right to take the one less favourable to the accused (H1) Edoko v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 379; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1465) 454

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Confession - Conviction - Where based solely on confessional statement that is unequivocal - Prevails on appeal in spite of absence of any corroborating evidence (H2) Fabiyi v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2349; (2015) 18 NWLR (Pt.1490) 80

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Confession - Corroboration - Exhibits G & H offered corroborative materials - And a consistent picture of the incident - In a way that appellant’s statement cannot be doubted (H1) Kolawole v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 411; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1460) 134

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Confession - Objection - Time - Proper time to raise objection to voluntariness of confession - Is at the point when it is to be tendered in evidence (H4) Alo v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 331; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1464) 238

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Confession - Relevancy - If confession is voluntary - It is deemed to be relevant fact as against the person who made it and no other - Unless the other adopts it (H1) Alo v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 331; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1464) 238

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Confession - Retraction - The fact that accused has retracted a confession - Does not mean that court cannot act and rely on same - To convict him (H2) State v. Gwan (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2469; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1477) 600

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Confession - Retraction - Where accused during trial retracts from extrajudicial statement earlier made to police - It is his duty to impeach the earlier statement (H7) Okanlawon v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2431; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 445

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Confession - Test of - Once accused retracts his confession - Court is expected to inter alia examine if there is anything outside the confession - To show that it is true (H8) Okanlawon v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2431; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 445

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Confession - Validity of - Appellant’s statement is confessional as she admitted being in possession of the drug - And voluntariness of same was determined after trial within trial (H4) Blessing v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1653; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 1

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Confession - Validity of - Exhibit K is a confessional statement - As the same was tendered and admitted without objection (H4) Okanlawon v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2431; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 445

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Confession - Validity of - Mere denial by appellant of having made Exhibits F4 & F5 - Did not challenge the voluntariness of his confession - Hence the confession is rightly admitted (H7) Mbang v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3113; (2013) 7 NWLR (Pt.1352) 48

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Confession - Voluntariness - Confession is irrelevant if it is obtained involuntarily - And such confession calls for trial within trial - To determine the extent of authenticity (H2) Alo v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 331; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1464) 238

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Confession - Voluntariness - Facts in appellant’s statement agree with evidence of PW1, 2 & 4 - As there is nothing to suggest otherwise than they were voluntarily made (H1) Busari v. State (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 53; (2015) 5 NWLR (Pt.1452) 343

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Confession - Voluntariness of - 1st respondent admission of having voluntarily signed the statement - Was tantamount to a confession which is the best form of evidence (H5) FRN v. Dairo (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 211; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1454) 141

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Conspiracy - Meaning of - It is an agreement of two or more persons - To do an act which is an offence - Which agreement need not be physical (H3) Busari v. State (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 53; (2015) 5 NWLR (Pt.1452) 343

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Conspiracy - Proof - Actus reus of the offence is agreement between two persons or more - To act unlawfully or lawfully in unlawful way - And it is inferred from facts and evidence led (H1) State v. Gwan (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2469; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1477) 600

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Conspiracy - Proof - Apart from appellant’s presence at the premises - No evidence exists to show that he agreed with co accused to store the firearms (H3) Roda v. FRN (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 121; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1468) 427

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Conspiracy - Proof - Where more than one person is accused of joint commission of crime - It is enough to prove that they all participated in the crime (H3) Alao v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1411; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1488) 245

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Contradiction - Weight - Contradiction in evidence of prosecution that will be fatal must be substantial - And must relate to the substance of the matter (H1) Uche v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1731; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1470) 380

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Contradiction - Weight - It is not every discrepancy in evidence of PW that leads to rejection - For the contradiction must be so material - As to cast grave doubts on prosecution’s case (H7) Alo v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 331; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1464) 238

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Conviction - Circumstantial evidence - Weight - It is often the best evidence but sparingly applied - Hence to ground a conviction - Such evidence must point to the guilt of accused (H1) Oketaolegun v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2531; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1477) 538

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Conviction - Confession - Court can convict accused on his confession - And such confession does not require corroboration - If it meets the requirements of the law (H3) Alo v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 331; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1464) 238

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Conviction - Confession - Court can convict on confession alone - Where it is unequivocal as to guilt of accused - Hence retraction of same will not vitiate its admission (H5) Blessing v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1653; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 1

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Conviction - Confession - Retraction - Court can convict on a retracted statement - But it is desirable to find external evidence that makes it probable that the confession was true (H2) Busari v. State (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 53; (2015) 5 NWLR (Pt.1452) 343

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Conviction - Confession - Where confession is established to be positive and unequivocal - The same will suffice to ground a finding of guilt - Regardless of any retraction (H9) Okanlawon v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2431; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 445

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Conviction - Validity - Appellate court will not set aside conviction made under a repealed law - If at the time there was existing law under which the conviction should have been made (H1) Adonike v. State (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 11; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1458) 237

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Conviction - Written law - Constitution 1999 s. 36(12) - No person can be convicted for an offence - Unless that offence is defined and penalty prescribed in a written law (H5) Roda v. FRN (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 121; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1468) 427

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Corroboration - Meaning of - For evidence to be corroborative - It must be an independent testimony which affects accused - By connecting or tending to connect him with the crime (H5) State v. Gwan (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2469; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1477) 600

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Cross examination - Extent of - Provided crucial facts raised in evidence in chief are examined and addressed upon - Cross examination need not be extensive - Before it could be relevant (H8) Ali v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1611; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 1

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Cross examination - Trial within trial - Confession - Validity of - Responses got from 3rd accused during cross examination at the mini trial - Show that his statement was voluntarily made (H2) FRN v. Borishade (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 81; (2015) 5 NWLR (Pt.1451) 155

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Defence - Consideration of - Any defence of which accused is entitled to should be considered - However unreasonable for what it is worth (H2) Edoko v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 379; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1465) 454

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Defence - Facilities - Copies of - Where accused requests for facilities to enable him prepare his defence - It will suffice if prosecution makes available the photocopies (H2) Okoye v. Commissioner of Police (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1493; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1488) 276

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Documents - Tendering of - Qualification - PW1 being an undisputed narcotic agent - CA rightly held that he was eminently qualified to tender Exhibit 4 (H7) Blessing v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1653; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 1

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Drugs - Conviction - Narcotic drug - Prosecution must inter alia prove that the drug is in the possession of accused - That it was knowingly in his possession - And that it is Indian hemp (H3) Blessing v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1653; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 1

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Evidence - Admission - Weight - Prosecution need not prove voluntariness - As 3rd accused admission of having voluntarily signed the statement was tantamount to a confession (H3) FRN v. Borishade (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 81; (2015) 5 NWLR (Pt.1451) 155

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Evidence - Contradiction - Weight - Evidence by PW2 about date of the crime was a discrepancy that did not affect his credibility - For a contradiction must be material to affect prosecution’s case (H4) Adonike v. State (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 11; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1458) 237

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Evidence - Contradiction - Weight - It is not every discrepancy in evidence of PW - That leads to rejection of such evidence - As it must be shown that the inconsistency is so material to cause doubts (H4) Alao v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1411; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1488) 245

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Evidence - Contradictions - Weight - Inconsistencies in evidence of PW1 are insignificant - And not substantial to have occasioned a miscarriage of justice (H6) Ali v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1611; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 1

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Evidence - Evaluation - Correctness of - Evaluation of the trial Judge is unassailable as there is nothing to show perversity - Hence Supreme Court will not interfere (H4) Busari v. State (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 53; (2015) 5 NWLR (Pt.1452) 343

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Evidence - Evaluation - Credibility of witness is a matter for trial court - And once conviction is based on credible evidence of single witness - The same shall not be open to question (H7) Ali v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1611; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 1

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Evidence - Production - Crime - Methods exist to compel production of material evidence - It is only when such are employed and opponent fails to comply - That withholding of evidence arises (H6) Busari v. State (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 53; (2015) 5 NWLR (Pt.1452) 343

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Evidence - Withholding of - It is presumed in this case - That evidence of police investigation and medical report - Were deliberately withheld by prosecution - Because if produced they would adversely affect its case (H2) Zubairu v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1919; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1486) 504

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Fair hearing - Breach - Allegation of - Bias against the trial court was uncalled for - As appellant was given adequate opportunity to be heard - And was heard in defence of the charge against him (H11) Okanlawon v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2431; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 445

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Fair hearing - Breach - Allegation of concealment of appellant’s statement is unfounded - As prosecution adduced evidence it felt sufficient to prove its case (H5) Busari v. State (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 53; (2015) 5 NWLR (Pt.1452) 343

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Fair hearing - Provision of facilities - Must be afforded to accused to aid in preparation of his defence - Otherwise it will amount to violation of fair hearing or fair trial (H1) Okoye v. Commissioner of Police (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1493; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1488) 276

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Identification - Proof - Whenever court is faced with evidence of identification - It must ensure and be satisfied that accused before it - Was the person who committed the offence (H2) Okanlawon v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2431; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 445

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Identification - Witness fixing accused at crime scene - Must mention name of accused at earliest opportunity time to police - Otherwise court will be cautious in accepting his evidence (H1) Idemudia v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2369; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1488) 375

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Identification parade - Evidence - Weight - To guard against cases of mistaken identity - Court must consider circumstances in which eye witness saw suspect - Length of time witness saw suspect (H5) Sale v. State (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3679; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 392

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Identification parade - Issue - Determination of - Identification of accused is only relevant - Where same is an issue before trial court - Otherwise court is not expected to dwell on it (H1) Fabiyi v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2349; (2015) 18 NWLR (Pt.1490) 80

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Identification parade - Necessity of - It is a must for conviction where victim did not know accused before the offence - Where victim was confronted by accused for a very short time (H4) Sale v. State (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3679; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 392

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Inadmissible evidence - Rejection of - Even where no objection is raised to its admission - Court is bound to reject inadmissible evidence - In the interest of justice (H1) Zubairu v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1919; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1486) 504

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Inconsistency rule - Application - Udo v. Queen - Inconsistency rule does not apply - To the previous confessions of an accused and his evidence in court (H3) Akinlolu v. State (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3601; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1497) 503

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Institution of - Powers of A-G Federation - The offences being federal indictment - The A-G may by himself or through an agent - Prosecute the offences alleged (H3) Dariye v. FRN (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 529; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1467) 325

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Institution of - State A-G - Powers of - 1999 Constitution s. 211(1) - The A-G can validly commence criminal proceedings - For any offence created under an Act of NA (H2) Mohammed v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 439

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Jurisdiction - FHC - Criminal jurisdiction of - Is exercisable in the division within which offence was committed - But it can assume jurisdiction following inter alia an order of transfer (H1) Roda v. FRN (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 121; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1468) 427

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Jurisdiction - FHC - Decision of Abuja division of the court to try offence that occurred in Kano - Which bears no relationship with the offence in Abuja - Is perverse (H4) Roda v. FRN (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 121; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1468) 427

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Legal practitioners - Address - Weight - Counsel’s address assists the court but it is not evidence - As a case is won on credible evidence - And failure to address will not cause miscarriage of justice (H1) Mohammad v. State (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 101

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Murder - Actus reus - Proof - Credible evidence adduced by PW1 - Who was the only direct eye witness to the incident - Is sufficient proof that act of appellant caused the death (H2) Ali v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1611; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 1

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Murder - Appeals - Fresh issue - Validity of - Although the issue of absence of appellant is fresh in SC - The court allowed same because of the criminal trial which attracted highest sentence (H3) Mohammad v. State (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 101

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Murder - Confession - Veracity of - From appellant’s positive account - Lower courts rightly resolved fact of the death of deceased - And that it was appellant’s gruesome act that caused it (H2) Iliyasu v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 559; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1469) 26

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Murder - Conviction - Circumstantial evidence - Where there is no direct evidence - Court can draw inference from proved facts - Going by circumstances surrounding the cause of death (H8) Alo v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 331; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1464) 238

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Murder - Conviction - Circumstantial evidence - Accused can be convicted of murder - Where there is cogent and compelling circumstantial evidence - To the fact that he killed the victim (H1) Jua v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2873; (2010) 4 NWLR (Pt.1184) 217

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Murder - Death - Proof - From evidence of PW2 which corroborated that of PW1 - And the medical report presented by PW4 - There is no contradiction that the deceased is dead (H1) Ali v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1611; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 1

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Murder - Evidence - Witnesses related to deceased - Nkebisi v. State - Such relationship does not disqualify them as prosecution witnesses - As what is vital is their credibility (H9) Ali v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1611; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 1

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Murder - Ingredients - Proof - For prosecution to secure a conviction - He must prove that deceased died - That the death was due to act of appellant - And that the act was intentional (H1) Maiyaki v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2735; (2008) 15 NWLR (Pt.1109) 173

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Murder - Ingredients - Proof - For prosecution to secure conviction - He must prove death of deceased - That the act of accused caused the death - And that the act was intentional (H4) Mbang v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3113; (2013) 7 NWLR (Pt.1352) 48

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Murder - Ingredients - Proof - Prosecution has burden to prove that accused killed the deceased - That the killing was unlawful - And that it was intentional (H1) Abirifon v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3021; (2013) 13 NWLR (Pt.1372) 587

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Murder - Ingredients - Proof - Prosecution must prove that the deceased died - That the death was unlawful - That act of accused caused the death - And that accused intended to cause death (H9) Alo v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 331; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1464) 238

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Murder - Ingredients - Proof - Prosecution must prove that deceased died - And that his death was caused by accused - Who intended to kill or cause grievous bodily harm to deceased (H1) Iliyasu v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 559; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1469) 26

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Murder - Ingredients - Proof - Prosecution must prove that the victim died - That the death resulted from act of accused - With intention that death or grievous bodily harm was probable effect (H1) Alao v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1411; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1488) 245

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Murder - Intention - Dangerous weapon - Where such weapon was used - Court will infer that death was a probable - And not just a likely consequence of accused act (H3) Iliyasu v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 559; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1469) 26

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Murder - Judgment - Absence of accused - In the absence of allocutus before death sentence on appellant - Presumption is that he was not present in court - Which omission vitiated the trial (H2) Mohammad v. State (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 101

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Murder - Mens rea - Proof - The use of axe on very sensitive part of the body - Is a confirmation that appellant intended death as the natural consequence of his act (H3) Ali v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1611; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 1

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Murder - Proof - Autopsy - Identity of deceased - Where prosecution identifies body of deceased via autopsy - Separate witness on issue of deceased’s identity is not vital (H2) Princewill v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2801; (1994) 6 NWLR (Pt.353) 703

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Murder - Proof - Conviction - Absence of autopsy - Where evidence abound that deceased had died - But autopsy was not conducted - Accused may be convicted on circumstantial evidence (H3) Princewill v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2801; (1994) 6 NWLR (Pt.353) 703

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Murder - Proof - Dangerous object - Where one stabs with a sharp object on vulnerable part of the body - He is deemed to have intended to cause bodily injury - Knowing that death could result (H2) Alao v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1411; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1488) 245

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Murder - Proof - Date of death - Contained in the charge cannot be presumed - As it is an ingredient of the charge to be proved beyond reasonable doubt (H3) Zubairu v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1919; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1486) 504

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Murder - Proof - Doctrine of last seen - In absence of explanation as to cause of death - A person last seen with deceased bears full responsibility for his death (H6) Iliyasu v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 559; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1469) 26

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Murder - Proof - Evidence - Evidence reveal that appellant certainly knew so much about the death of deceased - And to these facts he did confess in his statement (H6) Alo v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 331; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1464) 238

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Murder - Proof - Exception - No matter the reckless conduct of accused - So long as the killing that resulted from his act was not intended - The act would not constitute murder (H2) Oketaolegun v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2531; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1477) 538

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Murder - Proof - From graphic accounts of exhibits F4 & F5 - None other than appellant as a party in criminis - Could possibly have killed the deceased (H8) Mbang v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3113; (2013) 7 NWLR (Pt.1352) 48

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Murder - Proof - Identity of deceased - Where evidence of autopsy is called - Failure to identify body of deceased is fatal - Save there is cogent evidence identifying deceased as killed by appellant (H1) Princewill v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2801; (1994) 6 NWLR (Pt.353) 703

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Murder - Proof - Ingredients - Prosecution must prove that the deceased had died - That act of the accused caused the death - And that the act was done with intention to cause death (H1) Akinlolu v. State (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3601; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1497) 503

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Murder - Proof - Means of - Murder can be proved by confession of accused - Direct evidence - Or by circumstantial evidence (H2) Abirifon v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3021; (2013) 13 NWLR (Pt.1372) 587

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Murder - Proof - Medical report - Is needed in this circumstance to identify body of the deceased - As the death did not occur instantly after injury was inflicted (H4) Zubairu v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1919; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1486) 504

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Murder - Proof - Standard of - To secure conviction for murder - Prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt - That the death of deceased was caused directly or indirectly by act of accused (H5) Princewill v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2801; (1994) 6 NWLR (Pt.353) 703

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Murder - Provocation - The defence would not avail appellant - As his reaction was disproportionate - Hence it is immaterial that he did not intend to hurt the deceased (H1) Owhoruke v. COP (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2235; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1483) 557

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Murder - Self defence - The defence would not avail appellant - Since at the time he stabbed the deceased - He was not in apprehension of death (H2) Owhoruke v. COP (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2235; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1483) 557

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Prima facie case - Proof - Facts alleged against appellant discloses a prima facie case - That if not contradicted and if believed - Will be sufficient to prove the case against him (H1) Dariye v. FRN (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 529; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1467) 325

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Proof - Burden of - Evidence Act s. 38 - Accused in criminal trials would not be convicted - Unless prosecution proves the offence beyond reasonable doubt (H7) Ibrahim v. State (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 995; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1469) 164

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Proof - Burden on accused - Although no burden is on accused to prove his innocence - But where there is presumption of guilty intent - Burden on accused is discharged on balance of probabilities (H3) Mbang v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3113; (2013) 7 NWLR (Pt.1352) 48

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Proof - Doubt - Any doubt cast on the case of prosecution - Should be resolved in accused favour (H8) Sale v. State (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3679; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 392

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Proof - Forensic evidence - Where exhibits point unequivocally to guilt of accused - Forensic is not necessary and accused can be convicted of the offence (H3) Jua v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2873; (2010) 4 NWLR (Pt.1184) 217

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Proof - Material witness - Prosecution must call all vital witnesses - Failure to so do will be fatal to its case - Which cannot be proved beyond reasonable doubt (H6) Sale v. State (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3679; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 392

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Proof - Material witness - Where there is a vital point in issue - And there is one witness whose evidence would settle it one way or the other - That witness ought to be called (H6) Ibrahim v. State (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 995; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1469) 164

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Proof - Means of - Guilt of accused person can be established by confessional statement - Circumstantial evidence - And evidence of an eye witness (H6) Okanlawon v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2431; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 445

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Proof - Number of witnesses - How many witnesses prosecution needs to prove its case - Is entirely its responsibility - But not that of the defence (H10) Okanlawon v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2431; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 445

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Proof - Number of witnesses - Prosecution’s duty is to produce evidence to prove its case - And not production of witnesses not necessary to establish its case (H9) Mbang v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3113; (2013) 7 NWLR (Pt.1352) 48

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Proof - Prima facie case - Is found to have been established where prosecution - Has proved the essential elements of the offence - And its evidence has not been discredited (H1) Uzoagba v. COP (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3143

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Proof - Standard of - Onus is on prosecution to prove guilt of accused beyond reasonable doubt - And there is no onus on accused to establish his innocence (H2) Mbang v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3113; (2013) 7 NWLR (Pt.1352) 48

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Proof - Standard of - Required is not proof beyond any shadow of doubt - But proof beyond reasonable doubt - Which connotes sufficiency of evidence against accused person (H2) Akinlolu v. State (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3601; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1497) 503

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Provocation - Conditions - Accused must clearly state the facts - Show that the provocation deprived him of self control - And must show a proportionate retaliation (H4) Edoko v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 379; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1465) 454

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Rape - Ingredients - Proof - Prosecution must prove that accused had sex with prosecutrix - That it was done without her consent - That she was not wife of accused - And that there was penetration (H2) Adonike v. State (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 11; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1458) 237

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Rape - Proof - Corroboration - Evidence from PW3 and exhibit A support case of PW1 that she was violated by appellant - Hence the lower courts were right that both evidence confirm that of PW1 (H3) Adonike v. State (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 11; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1458) 237

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Robbery - Conviction - Even if Exhibit E was expunged from the record - There was still evidence to find guilt of robbery - Hence appellant was rightly convicted for robbery (H1) Pius v. State (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1053; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1459) 628

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Robbery - Stolen item - Recent possession - Since the items were found with appellant after the robbery - It is presumed that he was one of the robbers - Or knew that the goods were stolen properties (H6) Mohammed v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 439

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Similar facts - Where accused is jointly tried with another - And their case is clearly interwoven - Conviction of one cannot stand where the other was discharged and acquitted (H10) Alo v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 331; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1464) 238

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Stealing - Proof - Prosecution must prove inter alia that the thing stolen is capable of being stolen - That accused has intention to permanently deprive the owner of the thing (H1) Oyebanji v. State (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2255; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1479) 270

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Tainted witness - As no attempt was made to show the falsity of trial court’s findings - CA affirmation that PW2 is not to be classified as tainted witness cannot be faulted (H3) Akinlolu v. State (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3601; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1497) 503

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Tainted witness - Where a witness is said to be tainted - Court must warn itself before admitting his evidence - And if he is an accomplice - His evidence requires corroboration (H2) Pius v. State (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1053; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1459) 628

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Trial - Jurisdiction - The appropriate means to determine in which jurisdiction to try accused - Is to identify what element of the offence occurred where (H2) Dariye v. FRN (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 529; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1467) 325

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Trial - Prima facie case - CPC ss. 158 & 159 - As prima facie case is found established against appellants - The case is remitted to the trial Magistrate Court for conclusion (H2) Uzoagba v. COP (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3143

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Trial - Time - Robbery & Firearms Act s. 12(6) - Although there is right to fair hearing for accused - Where delay is occasioned before arraignment - The same will not invalidate the trial (H1) Mohammed v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 439

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Trial - Venue - As the key witnesses and appellant are resident within jurisdiction of the trial court - To move the trial to another location is an exercise in forum shopping (H4) Dariye v. FRN (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 529; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1467) 325

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Trial within trial - Conduct of - Having cast doubt on voluntariness of respondent’s statement - The trial Judge ought to have concluded the already started mini trial (H3) State v. Gwan (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2469; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1477) 600

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Trial within trial - Purpose and time - Essence of conducting the mini trial is to test voluntariness of confession - And this is done at the tendering of the confession (H6) Mbang v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3113; (2013) 7 NWLR (Pt.1352) 48

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - University - Confession - Objection - 3rd accused being a University graduate - Ought to know the import of the claim that a statement was made involuntarily (H1) FRN v. Borishade (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 81; (2015) 5 NWLR (Pt.1451) 155

 

CROSS EXAMINATION - Evidence - Admissibility - Evidence obtained in cross examination on matters that are pleaded - Is admissible (H8) Omisore v. Aregbesola (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1821; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1482) 205

 

CROSS EXAMINATION - Extent of - Provided crucial facts raised in evidence in chief are examined and addressed upon - Cross examination need not be extensive - Before it could be relevant (H8) Ali v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1611; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 1

 

CROSS EXAMINATION - Objective - The main aim is to damage the case of prosecution - And to make court believe that accused did not commit the offence (H2) Jua v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2873; (2010) 4 NWLR (Pt.1184) 217

 

CROSS EXAMINATION - Proof - Prima facie case - Is found to have been established where prosecution - Has proved the essential elements of the offence - And its evidence has not been discredited (H1) Uzoagba v. COP (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3143

 

CROSS EXAMINATION - Trial within trial - Confession - Validity of - Responses got from 3rd accused during cross examination at the mini trial - Show that his statement was voluntarily made (H2) FRN v. Borishade (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 81; (2015) 5 NWLR (Pt.1451) 155

 

CUSTOMARY LAW - Courts - Customary courts - To ascertain capacity in which a party initiates action in the court - The whole proceedings must be looked into - And broad interpretation placed on the judgment (H2) Jitte v. Okpulor (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3649; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1497) 542

 

CUSTOMARY LAW - Land law - Sale - Yoruba Customary Law - The sale is not valid under the custom - As respondent still retains the legal title over the land - Since the purchase price was not fully paid (H4) Ogundalu v. Macjob (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1021; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1460) 96

 

CUSTOMARY LAW - Land law - Variation order - CA rightly varied the decision of the trial customary court - Rather than reversing same - For this was done in the general interest of the family (H5) Jitte v. Okpulor (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3649; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1497) 542

 

DAMAGES - Award - Basis - Amount of damages awarded by trial court - Is based on evidence before the court - And where there is no evidence in support - The claim would be dismissed (H10) CBN v. Okojie (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2149; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1479) 231

 

DAMAGES - Award - Correctness of - Damages awarded to respondent was correct - As there was nothing from appellants - To dispute the facts on which the award was made (H12) CBN v. Okojie (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2149; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1479) 231

 

DAMAGES - Award - Double compensation - A person fully compensated under one head of damages for a particular injury - Cannot be awarded damages in respect of same injury under another head (H6) British Airways v. Atoyebi (2015) 11 KLR (pt. 374) 3425; (2014) 13 NWLR (Pt.1424) 253

 

DAMAGES - Award - Interference - Appellate court does not interfere with award - Save where trial court acted under a mistake of law - Or the amount awarded is either ridiculously low or high (H5) British Airways v. Atoyebi (2015) 11 KLR (pt. 374) 3425; (2014) 13 NWLR (Pt.1424) 253

 

DAMAGES - Award - Interference - Damages are awarded at the discretion of trial Judge - And appeal court does not interfere unless - The exercise is tainted with irregularity (H11) CBN v. Okojie (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2149; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1479) 231

 

DAMAGES - Award - Purpose of - Damages are awarded to compensate plaintiff for the harm done to him - Or to punish defendant for his conduct in inflicting that harm (H2) British Airways v. Atoyebi (2015) 11 KLR (pt. 374) 3425; (2014) 13 NWLR (Pt.1424) 253

 

DAMAGES - Carriage by air - Liability - Limit - Exception - In view of appellant’s wilful misconduct - Its liability cannot be restricted to the amount in Article 22(2) of CAO - As damages is awarded once wilful misconduct is established (H1) British Airways v. Atoyebi (2015) 11 KLR (pt. 374) 3425; (2014) 13 NWLR (Pt.1424) 253

 

DAMAGES - Contracts - Breach - Damages - Court is concerned with damages which are natural and probable consequences of the breach - Or damages within the contemplation of parties (H1) Agu v. General Oil Ltd. (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1155; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1488) 327

 

DAMAGES - Contracts - Breach - Damages - Pleadings - Award of general damages based on the unsubstantiated allegation - In addition to special damages awarded - Amounted to double compensation (H3) Agu v. General Oil Ltd. (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1155; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1488) 327

 

DAMAGES - Contracts - Breach - Speculative damages - Court should not consider damages which are speculative - Unless they are specifically provided for - By express terms of the contract (H2) Agu v. General Oil Ltd. (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1155; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1488) 327

 

DAMAGES - Exemplary damages - Award - Purpose of - It is awarded to punish defendant for his conduct in inflicting injury on plaintiff - And can be made in addition to normal compensatory damages (H8) CBN v. Okojie (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2149; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1479) 231

 

DAMAGES - Exemplary damages - Proof - Claim for such damages need not be pleaded expressly - It is enough if facts in the pleadings support award of the damages (H7) CBN v. Okojie (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2149; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1479) 231

 

DAMAGES - General damages - Computation of - Such damages need not be specifically pleaded - As it arises by inference of law and must not be proved by evidence - And may be averred generally (H3) British Airways v. Atoyebi (2015) 11 KLR (pt. 374) 3425; (2014) 13 NWLR (Pt.1424) 253

 

DAMAGES - Maritime law - Oil spillage - Proof - Damages awarded are not baseless - As evidence showed that some fishes died as a result of the spillage (H5) SPDC Nig. Ltd. v. Anaro (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2281; (2015) 12 NWLR (Pt.1472) 122

 

DAMAGES - Special damages - Proof - Such damages must be specifically pleaded and strictly proved - As it is not presumed to be the consequence of defendant’s act - But arises from special circumstances (H4) British Airways v. Atoyebi (2015) 11 KLR (pt. 374) 3425; (2014) 13 NWLR (Pt.1424) 253

 

DEBTS - Documents - Admissibility - Letters of counsel - By virtue of the correspondence not marked without prejudice - Appellants should not deny their admission - And acknowledgment of indebtedness (H6) Ifeanyichukwu Trad. Invest. Ven. Ltd. v. Onyesom Comm. Bank (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2183; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1487) 1

 

DEBTS - Undefended suits - Acknowledgment of debt - Failure of appellants to file affidavit with notice of intention to defend - Was clear admission of indebtedness and the sum claimed (H5) Ifeanyichukwu Trad. Invest. Ven. Ltd. v. Onyesom Comm. Bank (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2183; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1487) 1

 

DEEDS - Banking - Loan facility - Liability - Appellant’s liability under the Deed of Guarantee includes - Interest, commission and banking charges - As clearly indicated in clauses 1-3 and 10 (H11) Unity Life & Fire Insurance Ltd. v. Int’l Bank of W. Africa (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2821; (2001) 7 NWLR (Pt.713) 610

 

DOCUMENTS - Admissibility - Letters of counsel - By virtue of the correspondence not marked without prejudice - Appellants should not deny their admission - And acknowledgment of indebtedness (H6) Ifeanyichukwu Trad. Invest. Ven. Ltd. v. Onyesom Comm. Bank (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2183; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1487) 1

 

DOCUMENTS - Admissibility - Objection - Appellant is to raise issue of non compliance with E.A. s. 57 - When the document was sought to be tendered - But having failed to object - No miscarriage of justice was suffered (H8) Blessing v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1653; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 1

 

DOCUMENTS - Amendment - Commencement - Amendment takes effect not from the date it is ordered by court - But from the date of the original document (H2) Akpamgbo-Okadigbo v. Chidi (1) (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 953; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 124

 

DOCUMENTS - Appeals - Document - Admissibility of - Where document is unlawfully admitted without objection at trial - Appellant can still object on appeal - Particularly where miscarriage of justice occurred (H5) Unity Life & Fire Insurance Ltd. v. Int’l Bank of W. Africa (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2821; (2001) 7 NWLR (Pt.713) 610

 

DOCUMENTS - Appeals - Extension of time - Reasons - From totality of the affidavit evidence including documents exhibited - Applicant has provided good and substantial reasons - For delay to appeal within prescribed period (H1) Amaechi v. Omehia (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3069; (2013) 16 NWLR (Pt.1381) 417

 

DOCUMENTS - Appeals - Filing - Document or process is deemed duly filed when it is taken to court registry - Assessed by officer assigned the responsibility and paid for (H4) Ogwe v. Inspector General Police (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 499; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1459) 505

 

DOCUMENTS - Appeals - Filing fees - Inadequacy of - Remedy - Where there is insufficient filing fee on document placed before the registry - Court should direct that such shortfall be remedied (H11) S.P.D.C. Nig. Ltd. v. Agbara (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3707; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1496) 353

 

DOCUMENTS - Appeals - Notice - Filing - Non compliance - Waiver - 5th respondent having failed to object to the irregularity in filing of the notice - Cannot now be allowed to complain of an occurrence he had thought little of (H2) Obi v. INEC (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2773; (2009) 18 NWLR (Pt.1172) 215

 

DOCUMENTS - Appeals - Notice - Filing - Non compliance with CA Rules O. 3 r. 2(1) - As to the venue to file appeal - Would only confer right to ask the court - To pronounce the notice void (H1) Obi v. INEC (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2773; (2009) 18 NWLR (Pt.1172) 215

 

DOCUMENTS - Banking - Admissibility - Secondary evidence - Form of - Under E.A. s. 96(2)(e) is a copy of entry in banker’s book - Which is admissible under certain conditions (H2) Unity Life & Fire Insurance Ltd. v. Int’l Bank of W. Africa (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2821; (2001) 7 NWLR (Pt.713) 610

 

DOCUMENTS - Banking - Entry in banker’s book - Admissibility - E.A. s. 96(1)(h) - Secondary evidence may be given of contents of a document - When inter alia the document is entry in banker’s book (H1) Unity Life & Fire Insurance Ltd. v. Int’l Bank of W. Africa (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2821; (2001) 7 NWLR (Pt.713) 610

 

DOCUMENTS - Banking - Loan facility - Liability - Appellant’s liability under the Deed of Guarantee includes - Interest, commission and banking charges - As clearly indicated in clauses 1-3 and 10 (H11) Unity Life & Fire Insurance Ltd. v. Int’l Bank of W. Africa (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2821; (2001) 7 NWLR (Pt.713) 610

 

DOCUMENTS - Banking - Statement of account - Admissibility of - Failure to object - As no objection was raised - Appellant is deemed to have consented - Although conditions precedent for its admissibility were not established (H3) Unity Life & Fire Insurance Ltd. v. Int’l Bank of W. Africa (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2821; (2001) 7 NWLR (Pt.713) 610

 

DOCUMENTS - Chieftaincy matters - Evidence - Unchallenged - Evidence of series of letters of complaint made without a response - Is a matter court is enjoined to act on as unchallenged evidence (H5) Kayih v. Yilbuk (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 625; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 26

 

DOCUMENTS - Consent document - Admissibility - Reliance is not totally placed on document put in evidence by consent - As court must still consider the weight to be attached to same (H12) Kayih v. Yilbuk (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 625; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 26

 

DOCUMENTS - Courts - Evaluation - A Judge is not permitted to embark on inquisitorial examination of documents outside court room - Or to act on what he discovered in same - Without evidence in support (H5) Omisore v. Aregbesola (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1821; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1482) 205

 

DOCUMENTS - Courts - Records - Regularity of - Records of court are presumed to be correct - Until they are successfully impugned (H2) Nobis-Elendu v. INEC (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 1981; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1485) 197

 

DOCUMENTS - Defence - Facilities - Copies of - Where accused requests for facilities to enable him prepare his defence - It will suffice if prosecution makes available the photocopies (H2) Okoye v. Commissioner of Police (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1493; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1488) 276

 

DOCUMENTS - Elections - Forgery - Allegation of - Must be proved beyond reasonable doubt - By producing the document from which the forgery was made and the forged document (H6) APC v. PDP (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1179; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1481) 1

 

DOCUMENTS - Electronic evidence - Computer document - Admissibility of - Exhibits 243 & 342 being computer generated documents - Could only have been admissible - Upon compliance with Evidence Act s. 84 (H11) Omisore v. Aregbesola (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1821; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1482) 205

 

DOCUMENTS - Evidence - Evaluation - And ascription of probative value to evidence - Are within the exclusive preserve of trial court - But where it relates to a document - Such rights are not exclusive to the court (H1) Ogundalu v. Macjob (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1021; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1460) 96

 

DOCUMENTS - Fundamental rights - Public document - Attachment of -Though words used in O. 3 r. 1 of the Rules are discretionary - There is still need to attach the proceedings - To arrive at a fair decision (H1) Onyekwuluje v. Benue State Govt. (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2043; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 40

 

DOCUMENTS - Land law - Title - Proof - Means of - Ownership may be proved by traditional evidence - Production of document of title - Acts of ownership - Acts of long possession - And proof of possession of adjacent land (H1) Addah v. Ubandawaki (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 183; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1458) 325

 

DOCUMENTS - Legal practitioners - Stamp & seal - Rules of Professional Conduct 2007 r. 10(1) - Effect of not fixing the approved seal & stamp - Is that document is deemed not to have been properly signed - But not incompetent (H3) Yaki v. Bagudu (2015) 11 KLR (pt. 374) 3503; (2015) 18 NWLR (Pt.1491) 288

 

DOCUMENTS - Public document - Admissibility - Evidence Act ss. 111 & 112 - For the admissibility of exhibits E, 1, 2 & 3 - There must be certified true copy of each of them (H10) Kayih v. Yilbuk (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 625; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 26

 

DOCUMENTS - Public document - Admissibility - Only duly certified copies of the documents are admissible - Where the parties do not intend to produce their originals (H10) Omisore v. Aregbesola (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1821; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1482) 205

 

DOCUMENTS - Res judicata - Judgment - Issue - Authenticity of the certificate having been settled to finality in the earlier case - Appellant is estopped from raising the issue in any other case (H7) APC v. PDP (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1179; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1481) 1

 

DOCUMENTS - Tendering of - Qualification - PW1 being an undisputed narcotic agent - CA rightly held that he was eminently qualified to tender Exhibit 4 (H7) Blessing v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1653; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 1

 

DRUGS - Appeals ­- Fresh issue - Leave - Issue of whether the narcotic drug comes within meaning of NDLEA Act s. 11(c)(d) was not before CA - And cannot be raised in SC for the first time without leave (H2) Blessing v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1653; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 1

 

DRUGS - Confession - Validity of - Appellant’s statement is confessional as she admitted being in possession of the drug - And voluntariness of same was determined after trial within trial (H4) Blessing v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1653; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 1

 

DRUGS - Conviction - Narcotic drug - Prosecution must inter alia prove that the drug is in the possession of accused - That it was knowingly in his possession - And that it is Indian hemp (H3) Blessing v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1653; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 1

 

ELECTION PETITIONS - Appeals - Hearing - Time limit - The appeal is statute barred by virtue of Constitution 1999 s. 285(7) - Hence Supreme Court has no jurisdiction to entertain it (H3) ACN v. INEC (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3031; (2013) 13 NWLR (Pt.1370) 161

 

ELECTION PETITIONS - Appeals - Issue - Appeal before CA relates to the petition - As dismissal of the petition by the trial Tribunal - Gave rise to the appeal before Court of Appeal (H5) Dankwambo v. Abubakar (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3237; (2016) 2 NWLR (Pt.1495) 157

 

ELECTION PETITIONS - Appeals - Parties - Interested parties - Petition against 3rd-36th respondents having been dismissed - Any appeal against the decision gives them sufficient interest (H4) Ihedioha v. Okorocha (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3287; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1492) 147

 

ELECTION PETITIONS - Appeals - Time limit - SC cannot invoke SC Act s. 22 to save the appeal - As CA by effluxion of time lacks jurisdiction - To adjudicate on the appeal (H2) CPC v. Yuguda (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2859; (2013) 7 NWLR (Pt.1354) 450

 

ELECTION PETITIONS - Dismissal - Effect of dismissal of 1st respondent’s petition by the Tribunal - Is that his right to challenge the election of the Governor and Deputy Governor of the State is truncated (H6) Dankwambo v. Abubakar (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3237; (2016) 2 NWLR (Pt.1495) 157

 

ELECTION PETITIONS - Filing - Time limit - Due to the peculiar nature of the matter - Any process filed out of time is incompetent - And is liable to be struck out (H9) Omisore v. Aregbesola (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1821; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1482) 205

 

ELECTION PETITIONS - Ground - Omoworare v. Omisore - Appellant having based its petition on impeachment of 2nd respondent - Decision of CA in the case law was rightly applied (H4) APC v. PDP (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1179; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1481) 1

 

ELECTION PETITIONS - Gubernatorial - Final court - Constitution 1999 s. 246 deprives SC of jurisdiction - To deal with gubernatorial election petition - As CA is the final court (H1) Sha’aban v. Sambo (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2975; (2010) 19 NWLR (Pt.1226) 353

 

ELECTION PETITIONS - Judgment - Validity - Res judicata - As judgment of trial Tribunal is valid and not set aside - Appellant cannot appeal on same subject matter without his political party (H2) Agbaje v. INEC (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3223; (2016) 4 NWLR (Pt.1501) 151

 

ELECTION PETITIONS - Jurisdiction - 1999 Constitution s. 285 - FHC lacks jurisdiction to entertain appellant’s suit - As the matter clearly belongs to Election Petition Tribunal (H1) ANPP v. Returning Officer Abia State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2855; (2007) 11 NWLR (Pt.1045) 431

 

ELECTION PETITIONS - Jurisdiction of Election Tribunal and Court of Appeal in respect of election petitions - Is derived from the Constitution 1999 (as amended) (H4) Dankwambo v. Abubakar (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3237; (2016) 2 NWLR (Pt.1495) 157

 

ELECTION PETITIONS - Nature - Election matters are sui generis unlike other civil matters - And jurisdiction to determine them is statutory - Hence common principles may not be applicable (H3) Lokpobiri v. Ogola (2015) 11 KLR (pt. 374) 3461; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 328

 

ELECTION PETITIONS - Nature of - Time is of the essence in election petitions - Hence a slight infraction of the rules - Particularly those relating to time - Can be fatal to the process filed (H1) Yaki v. Bagudu (2015) 11 KLR (pt. 374) 3503; (2015) 18 NWLR (Pt.1491) 288

 

ELECTION PETITIONS - Necessary party - 4th & 5th respondents not being INEC officials - Are not necessary or even parties to the petition - Challenging the gubernatorial election (H1) APC v. PDP (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1179; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1481) 1

 

ELECTION PETITIONS - Nomination - Jurisdiction - After the conduct of an election - A person wishing to challenge result of the election on ground of nomination - Can do so at election tribunal under EA 2010 s. 138(1)(a) (H3) Wambai v. Donatus (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3163; (2014) 14 NWLR (Pt.1427) 223

 

ELECTION PETITIONS - Preelection - Jurisdiction - FHC - Concurrent jurisdiction conferred on FHC by Evidence Act in pre & post election matters - Is in addition to its exclusive jurisdiction in s. 251 of Constitution 1999 (H4) Lokpobiri v. Ogola (2015) 11 KLR (pt. 374) 3461; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 328

 

ELECTION PETITIONS - Tribunal - Composition - Consultation with the State CJ and President CCA by PCA - Is not precondition for constituting tribunal - Rather it is aimed at getting eligible members (H3) Nyesom v. Peterside (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3361; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1492) 71

 

ELECTION PETITIONS - Tribunal - Composition of - Constitution 1999 s. 285(4) - The Tribunal was not properly constituted to determine the petition - Hence any decision it reached was a nullity (H3) MPPP v. INEC (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3335

 

ELECTION PETITIONS - Tribunal - Establishment of - The Tribunal having been established under Constitution 1999 s. 285(2) - The act of its establishment cannot be said to be a futuristic event (H2) Nyesom v. Peterside (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3361; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1492) 71

 

ELECTION PETITIONS - Tribunal - Relocation of - In view of security challenges in the State - PCA rightly applied doctrine of necessity - To relocate the Tribunal from the State to Abuja (H6) Nyesom v. Peterside (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3361; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1492) 71

 

ELECTIONS - Action - Locus standi - Only a participant in primaries can complain of the outcome - But as appellant did not participate in the rerun primaries - He has no locus standi to institute the suit (H5) Daniel v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 809; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1463) 113

 

ELECTIONS - Action - Mandatory injunction - 1st to 5th respondents’ quest for the injunction in respect of election matter - Filed at HC instead of election tribunal - Is not maintainable in law (H3) Akpamgbo-Okadigbo v. Chidi (2) (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 759; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 124

 

ELECTIONS - Appeals - Academic issue - Courts should not spend judicial time on such issue - But since the present appeal is being heard and decided before 29/05/2015 - It is not an academic exercise (H2) Daniel v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 809; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1463) 113

 

ELECTIONS - Appeals - Relief - Consideration of appellant’s claim in view of his assertion in a primary he never participated in - Is a worthless exercise - Hence the CA decision is unassailable (H3) Daniel v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 809; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1463) 113

 

ELECTIONS - Appeals - Res judicata - Appellant is stopped per rem judicatam - From bringing same case before the court - As he cannot question conduct of election - In which he did not participate (H5) Sylva v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1067; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1486) 576

 

ELECTIONS - Crime - Allegation of - Proof - Appellant has not shown the basis for holding 4th & 5th respondents - Vicariously liable for the criminal acts of unnamed soldiers (H2) APC v. PDP (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1179; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1481) 1

 

ELECTIONS - Document - Forgery - Allegation of - Must be proved beyond reasonable doubt - By producing the document from which the forgery was made and the forged document (H6) APC v. PDP (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1179; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1481) 1

 

ELECTIONS - Fair hearing - Breach - Reliefs granted to 1st to 17th respondents in absence of appellants - Is in breach of right to fair hearing of the latter - Hence the proceedings being perverse is set aside (H3) Akpamgbo-Okadigbo v. Chidi (1) (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 953; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 124

 

ELECTIONS - Gubernatorial - Jurisdiction - Proper forum to determine appellant’s challenge of the return of 3rd respondent - Is the Governorship Election Tribunal (H3) James v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 863; (2015) 12 NWLR (Pt.1474) 538

 

ELECTIONS - House of assembly - Jurisdiction - From the nature of the cause of action - 1st to 5th respondents’ claim can only be maintained as a petition filed at the election petition tribunal (H2) Akpamgbo-Okadigbo v. Chidi (2) (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 759; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 124

 

ELECTIONS - LG chairmen - Expired tenure - Since tenure of appellants have been spent - There cannot be any benefit accruing to them - As the res had finished and became extinct (H3) Ogbolosingha v. Bayelsa S.I.E.C. (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 461; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1455) 311

 

ELECTIONS - LG chairmen - Oath of office - Significance of -Subscription to the oath is used for purpose of computing tenure of office - And for entering into office (H6) Ogbolosingha v. Bayelsa S.I.E.C. (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 461; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1455) 311

 

ELECTIONS - LG chairmen - Tenure - Duration of - Three years period provided in the LG Law s. 27(3)(a) is immutable - And no political party can elongate the prescribed tenure (H5) Ogbolosingha v. Bayelsa S.I.E.C. (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 461; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1455) 311

 

ELECTIONS - Nomination - Clarification of - INEC has legal and moral duty to point out - That applicant was not a candidate at the election it conducted (H1) PPA v. INEC (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2941; (2012) 13 NWLR (Pt.1317) 215

 

ELECTIONS - Non compliance - Allegation of - Must be established to have had substantial effect on election result - And must establish any infraction of the Act no matter how minuscule (H7) Omisore v. Aregbesola (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1821; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1482) 205

 

ELECTIONS - Orders of court - Nomination - Status quo - CA ought to have given an order - Which confines the parties to state of things as it was before litigation started (H2) Soludo v. Osigbo (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2983; (2009) 18 NWLR (Pt.1173) 290

 

ELECTIONS - Political party - Importance of - Amaechi v. INEC - Political parties and not candidates are the most important in an election (H1) Agbaje v. INEC (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3223; (2016) 4 NWLR (Pt.1501) 151

 

ELECTIONS - Preelection - Jurisdiction - Preelection matter filed prior to election subsists - And HC in which it was so instituted continues to have jurisdiction - Even after conduct of the election (H1) Wambai v. Donatus (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3163; (2014) 14 NWLR (Pt.1427) 223

 

ELECTIONS - Preelection - Jurisdiction - Where there is complaint about conduct of primaries - Court can by Electoral Act s. 87(9) - Examine if the election complied with the Act and constitution of the political party (H1) Akpamgbo-Okadigbo v. Chidi (1) (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 953; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 124

 

ELECTIONS - Preelection - SC order - Amendment of - The order made by this court in the earlier appeal is set aside - As SC is not one of the courts regulated by Electoral Act s. 141 (H3) Jev v. Iyortom (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 601; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1483) 484

 

ELECTIONS - Preelection matter - Time frame - Electoral Act s. 89(9) neither set time within which to conclude the matter - Nor when to commence same (H3) Nobis-Elendu v. INEC (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 1981; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1485) 197

 

ELECTIONS - Primaries - Jurisdiction - Where dispute arises as to which of the primaries produced candidate for a political party - The matter is taken outside Electoral Act 2010 s. 87(4)(b)(ii), (c)(ii) & (9) (H2) Ugwu v. PDP (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 731; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1459) 478

 

ELECTIONS - Primaries - Relief - The injunctive relief sought against 2nd respondent cannot be made - As 1st respondent can no longer submit appellants’ name as the party’s candidate (H3) Ugwu v. PDP (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 731; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1459) 478

 

ELECTIONS - Primary election - Certificate of clearance - Import of the provisional certificate is that - Appellant could be excluded at the rerun primaries - As this is an internal affair of the political party (H1) Daniel v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 809; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1463) 113

 

ELECTIONS - Primary election - Where complaint is on non compliance with political party’s guidelines in the election - An aspirant may approach FHC or State HC for redress (H4) James v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 863; (2015) 12 NWLR (Pt.1474) 538

 

ELECTIONS - Time - Sui generis - Time is of essence in election matters - Hence the delay of more than 3 months to raise appellant’s complaint - Made the matter a post election one to be determined at the Tribunal (H5) James v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 863; (2015) 12 NWLR (Pt.1474) 538

 

ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE - Computer document - Admissibility of - Exhibits 243 & 342 being computer generated documents - Could only have been admissible - Upon compliance with Evidence Act s. 84 (H11) Omisore v. Aregbesola (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1821; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1482) 205

 

ESTOPPEL - Election petitions - Validity - Res judicata - As judgment of trial Tribunal is valid and not set aside - Appellant cannot appeal on same subject matter without his political party (H2) Agbaje v. INEC (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3223; (2016) 4 NWLR (Pt.1501) 151

 

ESTOPPEL - Res judicata - Application - Conditions - For the plea to succeed - Parties must be the same in the two cases - Issues and subject matter must be the same - And judgment must be valid (H1) Omokhafe v. Esekhomo (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2783; (1993) 8 NWLR (Pt.309) 58

 

ESTOPPEL - Res judicata - Issue - Authenticity of the certificate having been settled to finality in the earlier case - Appellant is estopped from raising the issue in any other case (H7) APC v. PDP (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1179; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1481) 1

 

ESTOPPEL - Res judicata - Plea - Condition - Party relying on the plea must establish inter alia that the parties and subject matter are the same - That the decision is valid and final - And that court has jurisdiction (H1) Ogbolosingha v. Bayelsa S.I.E.C. (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 461; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1455) 311

 

EVIDENCE - Accident - Dangerous driving - Proof - Exhibit C was prima facie evidence of dangerous driving - And a sufficient circumstantial evidence required to sustain a conviction (H1) Adeyemo v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1591; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1485) 311

 

EVIDENCE - Accidents - Dangerous driving - Death - Proof - From evidence adduced by PW2 and the medical report - Cause of death could be inferred to be due to the accident (H4) Adeyemo v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1591; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1485) 311

 

EVIDENCE - Accidents - Dangerous driving - Federal highway - Proof - The accident occurred along a road - Which was taken judicial notice of by both lower courts - As federal highway (H5) Adeyemo v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1591; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1485) 311

 

EVIDENCE - Accidents - Dangerous driving - Ingredients - Proof - Prosecution must prove that manner of driving was reckless - That the dangerous driving caused death - And that accident occurred on federal highway (H3) Adeyemo v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1591; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1485) 311

 

EVIDENCE - Accidents - Defence - Challenge - Where the defence is raised - Prosecution must lead credible and admissible evidence - To convince court that the defence does not avail accused (H3) Maiyaki v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2735; (2008) 15 NWLR (Pt.1109) 173

 

EVIDENCE - Accidents - Proof - Witnesses - Appellant was at liberty to call any of the surviving passengers - As witness to support his case - And should not dictate to prosecution how to carry out its job (H2) Adeyemo v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1591; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1485) 311

 

EVIDENCE - Actions - Civil matters - Proof - Standard of - Such matters are decided on balance of probabilities - Hence trial Area Court rightly found that evidence of respondents outweighed that of appellant (H3) Sakati v. Bako (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2085; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1480) 531

 

EVIDENCE - Actions - Crime - Allegation of - Proof - Evidence Act s. 135(1) - Allegation of fraud and conspiracy on which 1st appellant based his case - Has to be proved beyond reasonable doubt (H2) ACN v. INEC (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3031; (2013) 13 NWLR (Pt.1370) 161

 

EVIDENCE - Actions - Determination - Basis - A case is decided on credible evidence led in trial court - And where no evidence is led - Nothing much can be achieved on appeal (H13) CBN v. Okojie (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2149; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1479) 231

 

EVIDENCE - Actions - Determination - Basis - Cases are decided on their peculiar facts - And in the light of the applicable law - As every case is an authority for the facts which it decides (H2) Dankwambo v. Abubakar (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3237; (2016) 2 NWLR (Pt.1495) 157

 

EVIDENCE - Admissibility - Objection - Appellant is to raise issue of non compliance with E.A. s. 57 - When the document was sought to be tendered - But having failed to object - No miscarriage of justice was suffered (H8) Blessing v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1653; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 1

 

EVIDENCE - Admissibility of - Basis - Test for admission of a piece of evidence is relevancy - Thus Exhibit 4 being relevant to the facts in issue is admissible (H6) Blessing v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1653; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 1

 

EVIDENCE - Admission - Weight - Prosecution need not prove voluntariness - As 3rd accused admission of having voluntarily signed the statement was tantamount to a confession (H3) FRN v. Borishade (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 81; (2015) 5 NWLR (Pt.1451) 155

 

EVIDENCE - Alibi - Defence - Conditions - For the defence to be entertained - It must be raised at earliest time - With sufficient particulars given of accused whereabouts - So as to enable police verify the claim (H10) Sale v. State (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3679; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 392

 

EVIDENCE - Alibi - Defence - Investigation - Prosecution must not investigate every alibi - But where accused story is capable of providing a defence - There is duty on prosecution to carry out investigation (H11) Sale v. State (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3679; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 392

 

EVIDENCE - Alibi - Investigation - Failure of the police to investigate the defence - As properly raised by appellant - Created serious lapse in the conduct of prosecuting the case (H3) Sani v. State (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2115; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1483) 522

 

EVIDENCE - Alibi - Investigation of - Alibi must be definite as to time and whereabouts of accused - And once timeously raised - It must be thoroughly investigated by the police (H2) Idemudia v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2369; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1488) 375

 

EVIDENCE - Alibi - Plea - Conditions - Accused must raise the defence at the earliest opportunity - Giving particulars of his whereabouts and those present with him - Otherwise it will not avail accused (H4) Iliyasu v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 559; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1469) 26

 

EVIDENCE - Alibi - Proof - Accused is not obliged to prove his alibi - As it is enough if he supplies material facts - Sufficient for police to investigate the defence raised (H4) Idemudia v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2369; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1488) 375

 

EVIDENCE - Appeals - Consolidation - Allegation of inconvenience - Proof - Respondents failed to establish how they would be confused - If the two appeals are heard and determined together (H3) Ngere v. Okuruket ‘XIV’ (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2215; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1482) 392

 

EVIDENCE - Appeals - Court - Document - Admissibility of - Where document is unlawfully admitted without objection at trial - Appellant can still object on appeal - Particularly where miscarriage of justice occurred (H5) Unity Life & Fire Insurance Ltd. v. Int’l Bank of W. Africa (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2821; (2001) 7 NWLR (Pt.713) 610

 

EVIDENCE - Appeals - Crime - Re evaluation - Is only done where trial court erred in evaluating facts - Thereby empowering appellate court to re examine the whole facts - And come to an independent decision (H4) Ali v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1611; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 1

 

EVIDENCE - Appeals - Evaluation - Having lawfully excluded the inadmissible evidence - CA review of evidence due to failure of the trial court in that regard - Cannot be said to be perverse (H6) Odom v. PDP (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 677; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1456) 527

 

EVIDENCE - Appeals - Evaluation - Interference - Judgment of trial court on matters of credibility is binding - Hence CA was in error when it expunged exhibit AX from the records (H4) FRN v. Borishade (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 81; (2015) 5 NWLR (Pt.1451) 155

 

EVIDENCE - Appeals - Evaluation - Issue as to whether party proved his claim - Cannot be determined without evaluating evidence - Hence CA rightly proceeded to evaluate the evidence and considered exhibits tendered (H6) Kabirikim v. Emefor (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2907; (2009) 14 NWLR (Pt.1162) 602

 

EVIDENCE - Appeals - Extension of time - Reasons - From totality of the affidavit evidence including documents exhibited - Applicant has provided good and substantial reasons - For delay to appeal within prescribed period (H1) Amaechi v. Omehia (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3069; (2013) 16 NWLR (Pt.1381) 417

 

EVIDENCE - Appeals - Pleadings - Defence - Failure to raise - Appellant cannot rely on defence not pleaded at trial - Because respondent would have due to his failure - Lost opportunity of calling evidence to controvert (H10) Unity Life & Fire Insurance Ltd. v. Int’l Bank of W. Africa (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2821; (2001) 7 NWLR (Pt.713) 610

 

EVIDENCE - Appeals - Preliminary objection - Basis - Under SC Rules 1999 preliminary objection is not restricted to grounds of law or facts - And even if affidavit is struck out - Grounds for the objection is intact (H2) PPA v. INEC (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2941; (2012) 13 NWLR (Pt.1317) 215

 

EVIDENCE - Appeals - Purpose of - It is to find out whether on the state of pleadings, evidence and applicable law - The lower court came to right decision - In relation to reliefs canvassed in the matter (H1) Odom v. PDP (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 677; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1456) 527

 

EVIDENCE - Armed robbery - Conspiracy - Conviction - Based solely on testimony of PW2 cannot stand - As testimony of the witness is unreliable - Since he failed to identify appellant at earliest time (H5) Idemudia v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2369; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1488) 375

 

EVIDENCE - Armed robbery - Contradiction in - Weight - Conflict as regards date of the offence created material doubt - As to whether the incident actually occurred (H2) Sani v. State (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2115; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1483) 522

 

EVIDENCE - Armed robbery - Ingredients - Proof - Beyond appellant’s confessional statement - Testimonies of PW1 & 5 establish that there was armed robbery - And that appellant was among the robbers (H3) Fabiyi v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2349; (2015) 18 NWLR (Pt.1490) 80

 

EVIDENCE - Armed robbery - Ingredients - Proof - Prosecution must prove factual reality of a robbery - Participation of accused in the robbery - And that he was armed with firearms (H4) Ibrahim v. State (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 995; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1469) 164

 

EVIDENCE - Armed robbery - Ingredients - Proof - Prosecution must prove that there was robbery - That the robbers were armed - And that accused was the armed robber or one of the armed robbers (H1) Okanlawon v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2431; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 445

 

EVIDENCE - Armed robbery - Ingredients - Proof - Prosecution needs to establish that there was robbery - That the robbery was armed robbery - And that appellant took part in the robbery (H4) Kolawole v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 411; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1460) 134

 

EVIDENCE - Armed robbery - Proof - Contradictions - Raised for appellant did not affect credibility of witnesses - Since he was arrested at the crime scene - Hence his involvement in the crime was rightly found (H2) Uche v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1731; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1470) 380

 

EVIDENCE - Armed robbery - Proof - Failure in PW testimony - Non direction by trial court on effect of failure to name appellant - Occasioned a miscarriage of justice (H5) Ibrahim v. State (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 995; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1469) 164

 

EVIDENCE - Armed robbery - Proof - Identification parade - Appellant cannot be said to have been identified by evidence of PW2 - As the trial court did not weigh the evidence - To prevent mistaken identity (H9) Sale v. State (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3679; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 392

 

EVIDENCE - Armed robbery - Proof - Ingredients - Prosecution must prove that there was robbery - That the same was armed robbery - And that appellant was one of those who took part in the armed robbery (H1) Sale v. State (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3679; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 392

 

EVIDENCE - Armed robbery - Proof - Ingredients - Prosecution must prove that there was robbery - That the same was armed robbery - And that appellant was one of those who took part in the armed robbery (H1) Sale v. State (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3679; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 392

 

EVIDENCE - Armed robbery - Proof - Prosecution failed to prove any ingredient of the offence - As there is no credible evidence to link appellant with the offence (H1) Sani v. State (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2115; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1483) 522

 

EVIDENCE - Armed robbery - Proof - PW2 having failed to identify appellant as to fix him at the crime scene - Cannot be accorded the status of a credible witness - To sustain the proof required of prosecution (H3) Idemudia v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2369; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1488) 375

 

EVIDENCE - Banking - Document - Admissibility - Secondary evidence - Form of - Under E.A. s. 96(2)(e) is a copy of entry in banker’s book - Which is admissible under certain conditions (H2) Unity Life & Fire Insurance Ltd. v. Int’l Bank of W. Africa (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2821; (2001) 7 NWLR (Pt.713) 610

 

EVIDENCE - Banking - Document - Entry in banker’s book - Admissibility - E.A. s. 96(1)(h) - Secondary evidence may be given of contents of a document - When inter alia the document is entry in banker’s book (H1) Unity Life & Fire Insurance Ltd. v. Int’l Bank of W. Africa (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2821; (2001) 7 NWLR (Pt.713) 610

 

EVIDENCE - Banking - Statement of account - Admissibility of - Failure to object - As no objection was raised - Appellant is deemed to have consented - Although conditions precedent for its admissibility were not established (H3) Unity Life & Fire Insurance Ltd. v. Int’l Bank of W. Africa (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2821; (2001) 7 NWLR (Pt.713) 610

 

EVIDENCE - Charges - Substantive charge and conspiracy - Proof - The approach is to deal with main charge before conspiracy - And failure to prove main charge does not make conviction for conspiracy inappropriate (H5) Okanlawon v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2431; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 445

 

EVIDENCE - Chieftaincy matters - Admitted fact - Weight - The fact of rotation of the chieftaincy title having been admitted - It is deemed as proved and needed no further proof (H8) Kayih v. Yilbuk (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 625; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 26

 

EVIDENCE - Chieftaincy matters - Unchallenged - Evidence of series of letters of complaint made without a response - Is a matter court is enjoined to act on as unchallenged evidence (H5) Kayih v. Yilbuk (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 625; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 26

 

EVIDENCE - Confession - Binding nature - Extent of - Where accused makes confession - He is not confessing for his accomplices - As the confession is only against him (H4) State v. Gwan (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2469; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1477) 600

 

EVIDENCE - Confession - Co accused - Weight - Evidence of a co accused is admissible against the other - Where for instance it tallied with the statement of the other (H3) Kolawole v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 411; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1460) 134

 

EVIDENCE - Confession - Conflicting versions - Where accused makes two statements voluntarily - Trial Judge will be right to take the one less favourable to the accused (H1) Edoko v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 379; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1465) 454

 

EVIDENCE - Confession - Conviction - Where based solely on confessional statement that is unequivocal - Prevails on appeal in spite of absence of any corroborating evidence (H2) Fabiyi v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2349; (2015) 18 NWLR (Pt.1490) 80

 

EVIDENCE - Confession - Corroboration - Exhibits G & H offered corroborative materials - And a consistent picture of the incident - In a way that appellant’s statement cannot be doubted (H1) Kolawole v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 411; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1460) 134

 

EVIDENCE - Confession - Objection - Time - Proper time to raise objection to voluntariness of confession - Is at the point when it is to be tendered in evidence (H4) Alo v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 331; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1464) 238

 

EVIDENCE - Confession - Relevancy - For confession to be relevant and admissible - It must be voluntarily made - As weight attached to confession is unquestionable - Where it is unequivocal and true (H5) Mbang v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3113; (2013) 7 NWLR (Pt.1352) 48

 

EVIDENCE - Confession - Relevancy - If confession is voluntary - It is deemed to be relevant fact as against the person who made it and no other - Unless the other adopts it (H1) Alo v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 331; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1464) 238

 

EVIDENCE - Confession - Retraction - The fact that accused has retracted a confession - Does not mean that court cannot act and rely on same - To convict him (H2) State v. Gwan (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2469; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1477) 600

 

EVIDENCE - Confession - Test of - Once accused retracts his confession - Court is expected to inter alia examine if there is anything outside the confession - To show that it is true (H8) Okanlawon v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2431; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 445

 

EVIDENCE - Confession - Validity of - Appellant’s statement is confessional as she admitted being in possession of the drug - And voluntariness of same was determined after trial within trial (H4) Blessing v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1653; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 1

 

EVIDENCE - Confession - Validity of - Exhibit K is a confessional statement - As the same was tendered and admitted without objection (H4) Okanlawon v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2431; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 445

 

EVIDENCE - Confession - Validity of - Mere denial by appellant of having made Exhibits F4 & F5 - Did not challenge the voluntariness of his confession - Hence the confession is rightly admitted (H7) Mbang v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3113; (2013) 7 NWLR (Pt.1352) 48

 

EVIDENCE - Confession - Voluntariness - Confession is irrelevant if it is obtained involuntarily - And such confession calls for trial within trial - To determine the extent of authenticity (H2) Alo v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 331; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1464) 238

 

EVIDENCE - Confession - Voluntariness - Facts in appellant’s statement agree with evidence of PW1, 2 & 4 - As there is nothing to suggest otherwise than they were voluntarily made (H1) Busari v. State (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 53; (2015) 5 NWLR (Pt.1452) 343

 

EVIDENCE - Confession - Voluntariness of - 1st respondent admission of having voluntarily signed the statement - Was tantamount to a confession which is the best form of evidence (H5) FRN v. Dairo (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 211; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1454) 141

 

EVIDENCE - Consent document - Admissibility - Reliance is not totally placed on document put in evidence by consent - As court must still consider the weight to be attached to same (H12) Kayih v. Yilbuk (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 625; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 26

 

EVIDENCE - Conspiracy - Proof - Actus reus of the offence is agreement between two persons or more - To act unlawfully or lawfully in unlawful way - And it is inferred from facts and evidence led (H1) State v. Gwan (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2469; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1477) 600

 

EVIDENCE - Conspiracy - Proof - Apart from appellant’s presence at the premises - No evidence exists to show that he agreed with co accused to store the firearms (H3) Roda v. FRN (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 121; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1468) 427

 

EVIDENCE - Conspiracy - Proof - Where more than one person is accused of joint commission of crime - It is enough to prove that they all participated in the crime (H3) Alao v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1411; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1488) 245

 

EVIDENCE - Contract of service - Proof - Aggrieved employee following termination from service - Must plead and prove his contract of service - To substantiate his claim (H1) Aji v. Chad Basin Dev. Auth. (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 937; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1486) 554

 

EVIDENCE - Contradiction - Weight - Contradiction in evidence of prosecution that will be fatal must be substantial - And must relate to the substance of the matter (H1) Uche v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1731; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1470) 380

 

EVIDENCE - Contradiction - Weight - Evidence by PW2 about date of the crime was a discrepancy that did not affect his credibility - For a contradiction must be material to affect prosecution’s case (H4) Adonike v. State (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 11; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1458) 237

 

EVIDENCE - Contradiction - Weight - It is not every discrepancy in evidence of PW that leads to rejection - For the contradiction must be so material - As to cast grave doubts on prosecution’s case (H7) Alo v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 331; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1464) 238

 

EVIDENCE - Contradiction - Weight - It is not every discrepancy in evidence of PW - That leads to rejection of such evidence - As it must be shown that the inconsistency is so material to cause doubts (H4) Alao v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1411; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1488) 245

 

EVIDENCE - Contradiction - Weight - Where there are material contradictions - Court is enjoined to reject the entire evidence - As it cannot pick and choose which of the conflicting versions to follow (H15) Kayih v. Yilbuk (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 625; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 26

 

EVIDENCE - Contradictions - Weight - Inconsistencies in evidence of PW1 are insignificant - And not substantial to have occasioned a miscarriage of justice (H6) Ali v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1611; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 1

 

EVIDENCE - Conviction - Best evidence - For purpose of conviction is voluntary confession to the crime by accused - And a conviction based on oral confession is proper in law (H6) Jua v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2873; (2010) 4 NWLR (Pt.1184) 217

 

EVIDENCE - Conviction - Circumstantial evidence - Weight - It is often the best evidence but sparingly applied - Hence to ground a conviction - Such evidence must point to the guilt of accused (H1) Oketaolegun v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2531; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1477) 538

 

EVIDENCE - Conviction - Confession - Court can convict accused on his confession - And such confession does not require corroboration - If it meets the requirements of the law (H3) Alo v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 331; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1464) 238

 

EVIDENCE - Conviction - Confession - Where confession is established to be positive and unequivocal - The same will suffice to ground a finding of guilt - Regardless of any retraction (H9) Okanlawon v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2431; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 445

 

EVIDENCE - Corroboration - Meaning of - For evidence to be corroborative - It must be an independent testimony which affects accused - By connecting or tending to connect him with the crime (H5) State v. Gwan (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2469; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1477) 600

 

EVIDENCE - Courts - Admissibility of - Court is expected to admit and act on legal evidence - But where inadmissible evidence is admitted - Court is not to act upon it but discountenance same (H4) Unity Life & Fire Insurance Ltd. v. Int’l Bank of W. Africa (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2821; (2001) 7 NWLR (Pt.713) 610

 

EVIDENCE - Courts - Admissibility of - Objection - Where inadmissible evidence is tendered - And party or counsel on other side fails to object - Court in civil cases may and in criminal cases must reject such evidence (H7) Unity Life & Fire Insurance Ltd. v. Int’l Bank of W. Africa (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2821; (2001) 7 NWLR (Pt.713) 610

 

EVIDENCE - Courts - Discretion - Exercise of - Basis - Exercise of discretion in one case may guide a court - But cannot bind another court in its exercise of discretion - As such exercise depends on the peculiar facts of a given case (H2) Amaechi v. Omehia (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3069; (2013) 16 NWLR (Pt.1381) 417

 

EVIDENCE - Courts - Discretion - Exercise of - Condition - Person seeking indulgence of court must place before it - Sufficient materials in order to assist court exercise its discretion in his favour (H2) Yar’adua v. CPC (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2989

 

EVIDENCE - Courts - Document - Evaluation - A Judge is not permitted to embark on inquisitorial examination of documents outside court room - Or to act on what he discovered in same - Without evidence in support (H5) Omisore v. Aregbesola (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1821; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1482) 205

 

EVIDENCE - Courts ­- Evaluation - Ascription of credibility to evidence of witnesses is within power of trial court - Which appellate courts cannot interfere with (H4) Omisore v. Aregbesola (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1821; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1482) 205

 

EVIDENCE - Courts - Judicial power - Entitlement to - For a person to be entitled to invoke judicial power - He must show that his personal interest will be or has been adversely affected (H1) Yar’adua v. CPC (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2989

 

EVIDENCE - Courts - Review of - Court reviews a part of evidence complained of through ground of appeal - Properly filed and challenging the evidence (H5) Alo v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 331; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1464) 238

 

EVIDENCE - Courts - Unchallenged evidence - Weight of - Where evidence given by party was not challenged by the opposite party - Court can act on such unchallenged evidence before it (H9) Unity Life & Fire Insurance Ltd. v. Int’l Bank of W. Africa (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2821; (2001) 7 NWLR (Pt.713) 610

 

EVIDENCE - Crime - Admission - Relevancy - Court in trial proceedings will admit in evidence - Only material facts for the just determination of the case before it (H5) Ali v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1611; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 1

 

EVIDENCE - Crime - Circumstantial evidence - Weight - In absence of direct evidence - Conviction may be based on circumstantial evidence - Provided it points to the guilt of accused (H5) Iliyasu v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 559; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1469) 26

 

EVIDENCE - Crime - Defence - Consideration of - Any defence of which accused is entitled to should be considered - However unreasonable for what it is worth (H2) Edoko v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 379; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1465) 454

 

EVIDENCE - Crime - Evaluation - Correctness of - Evaluation of the trial Judge is unassailable as there is nothing to show perversity - Hence Supreme Court will not interfere (H4) Busari v. State (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 53; (2015) 5 NWLR (Pt.1452) 343

 

EVIDENCE - Crime - Identification - Witness fixing accused at crime scene - Must mention name of accused at earliest opportunity time to police - Otherwise court will be cautious in accepting his evidence (H1) Idemudia v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2369; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1488) 375

 

EVIDENCE - Crime - Material witness - Where there is a vital point in issue - And there is one witness whose evidence would settle it one way or the other - That witness ought to be called (H6) Ibrahim v. State (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 995; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1469) 164

 

EVIDENCE - Crime - Proof - Burden of - Evidence Act s. 38 - Accused in criminal trials would not be convicted - Unless prosecution proves the offence beyond reasonable doubt (H7) Ibrahim v. State (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 995; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1469) 164

 

EVIDENCE - Crime - Proof - Means of - Guilt of accused person can be established by confessional statement - Circumstantial evidence - And evidence of an eye witness (H6) Okanlawon v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2431; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 445

 

EVIDENCE - Crime - Proof - Number of witnesses - How many witnesses prosecution needs to prove its case - Is entirely its responsibility - But not that of the defence (H10) Okanlawon v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2431; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 445

 

EVIDENCE - Crime - Trial - Venue - As the key witnesses and appellant are resident within jurisdiction of the trial court - To move the trial to another location is an exercise in forum shopping (H4) Dariye v. FRN (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 529; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1467) 325

 

EVIDENCE - Criminal trial - Similar facts - Where accused is jointly tried with another - And their case is clearly interwoven - Conviction of one cannot stand where the other was discharged and acquitted (H10) Alo v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 331; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1464) 238

 

EVIDENCE - Cross examination - Admissibility - Evidence obtained in cross examination on matters that are pleaded - Is admissible (H8) Omisore v. Aregbesola (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1821; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1482) 205

 

EVIDENCE - Cross examination - Extent of - Provided crucial facts raised in evidence in chief are examined and addressed upon - Cross examination need not be extensive - Before it could be relevant (H8) Ali v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1611; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 1

 

EVIDENCE - Cross examination - Trial within trial - Confession - Validity of - Responses got from 3rd accused during cross examination at the mini trial - Show that his statement was voluntarily made (H2) FRN v. Borishade (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 81; (2015) 5 NWLR (Pt.1451) 155

 

EVIDENCE - Damages - Award - Basis - Amount of damages awarded by trial court - Is based on evidence before the court - And where there is no evidence in support - The claim would be dismissed (H10) CBN v. Okojie (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2149; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1479) 231

 

EVIDENCE - Damages - Exemplary damages - Proof - Claim for such damages need not be pleaded expressly - It is enough if facts in the pleadings support award of the damages (H7) CBN v. Okojie (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2149; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1479) 231

 

EVIDENCE - Damages - General damages - Computation of - Such damages need not be specifically pleaded - As it arises by inference of law and must not be proved by evidence - And may be averred generally (H3) British Airways v. Atoyebi (2015) 11 KLR (pt. 374) 3425; (2014) 13 NWLR (Pt.1424) 253

 

EVIDENCE - Damages - Special damages - Proof - Such damages must be specifically pleaded and strictly proved - As it is not presumed to be the consequence of defendant’s act - But arises from special circumstances (H4) British Airways v. Atoyebi (2015) 11 KLR (pt. 374) 3425; (2014) 13 NWLR (Pt.1424) 253

 

EVIDENCE - Defence - Facilities - Copies of - Where accused requests for facilities to enable him prepare his defence - It will suffice if prosecution makes available the photocopies (H2) Okoye v. Commissioner of Police (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1493; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1488) 276

 

EVIDENCE - Documents - Admissibility - Letters of counsel - By virtue of the correspondence not marked without prejudice - Appellants should not deny their admission - And acknowledgment of indebtedness (H6) Ifeanyichukwu Trad. Invest. Ven. Ltd. v. Onyesom Comm. Bank (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2183; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1487) 1

 

EVIDENCE - Drugs - Conviction - Narcotic drug - Prosecution must inter alia prove that the drug is in the possession of accused - That it was knowingly in his possession - And that it is Indian hemp (H3) Blessing v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1653; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 1

 

EVIDENCE - Elections - Crime - Allegation of - Proof - Appellant has not shown the basis for holding 4th & 5th respondents - Vicariously liable for the criminal acts of unnamed soldiers (H2) APC v. PDP (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1179; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1481) 1

 

EVIDENCE - Elections - Document - Forgery - Allegation of - Must be proved beyond reasonable doubt - By producing the document from which the forgery was made and the forged document (H6) APC v. PDP (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1179; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1481) 1

 

EVIDENCE - Elections - Non compliance - Allegation of - Must be established to have had substantial effect on election result - And must establish any infraction of the Act no matter how minuscule (H7) Omisore v. Aregbesola (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1821; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1482) 205

 

EVIDENCE - Electronic evidence - Computer document - Admissibility of - Exhibits 243 & 342 being computer generated documents - Could only have been admissible - Upon compliance with Evidence Act s. 84 (H11) Omisore v. Aregbesola (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1821; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1482) 205

 

EVIDENCE - Evaluation - And ascription of probative value to evidence - Are within the exclusive preserve of trial court - But where it relates to a document - Such rights are not exclusive to the court (H1) Ogundalu v. Macjob (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1021; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1460) 96

 

EVIDENCE - Evaluation - Credibility of witness is a matter for trial court - And once conviction is based on credible evidence of single witness - The same shall not be open to question (H7) Ali v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1611; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 1

 

EVIDENCE - Fair hearing - Breach - Allegation of concealment of appellant’s statement is unfounded - As prosecution adduced evidence it felt sufficient to prove its case (H5) Busari v. State (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 53; (2015) 5 NWLR (Pt.1452) 343

 

EVIDENCE - Fraud - Misappropriation of funds - Proof - Relationship between the parties is not merely contractual - As appellant’s unlawful appropriation of money paid to him - Involves a criminal act (H3) Oyebanji v. State (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2255; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1479) 270

 

EVIDENCE - Fundamental rights - Enforcement - Unchallenged evidence - Of respondent that he was unlawfully arrested and prosecuted - Is credible and compelling (H3) CBN v. Okojie (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2149; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1479) 231

 

EVIDENCE - Fundamental rights - Pleadings - Averments - Not supported by evidence - Absence of evidence to establish the legality of respondent’s arrest - Renders the arrest unlawful (H2) CBN v. Okojie (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2149; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1479) 231

 

EVIDENCE - Identification - Proof - Whenever court is faced with evidence of identification - It must ensure and be satisfied that accused before it - Was the person who committed the offence (H2) Okanlawon v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2431; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 445

 

EVIDENCE - Identification - Proof - Whenever court is faced with evidence of identification - It must ensure and be satisfied that accused before it - Was the person who committed the offence (H2) Okanlawon v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2431; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 445

 

EVIDENCE - Identification parade - Issue - Determination of - Identification of accused is only relevant - Where same is an issue before trial court - Otherwise court is not expected to dwell on it (H1) Fabiyi v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2349; (2015) 18 NWLR (Pt.1490) 80

 

EVIDENCE - Identification parade - Weight - To guard against cases of mistaken identity - Court must consider circumstances in which eye witness saw suspect - Length of time witness saw suspect (H5) Sale v. State (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3679; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 392

 

EVIDENCE - Inadmissible evidence - Rejection of - Even where no objection is raised to its admission - Court is bound to reject inadmissible evidence - In the interest of justice (H1) Zubairu v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1919; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1486) 504

 

EVIDENCE - Inconsistency rule - Application - Udo v. Queen - Inconsistency rule does not apply - To the previous confessions of an accused and his evidence in court (H3) Akinlolu v. State (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3601; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1497) 503

 

EVIDENCE - Judgments - Validity - CA judgment is in breach of Constitution 1999 s. 285(8) - As a judgment must show clear resolution of all issues - And end with ultimate verdict flowing from facts and law (H1) CPC v. Yuguda (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2859; (2013) 7 NWLR (Pt.1354) 450

 

EVIDENCE - Jurisdiction - Determination of - Basis - Where the objection is raised by motion supported by affidavit - The affidavit evidence and facts deposed to in opposition must be considered (H2) Roda v. FRN (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 121; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1468) 427

 

EVIDENCE - Land law - Fraud - Proof - Allegation of 1st respondent that Exhibit 1 was fraudulently obtained is of no moment - As he failed to prove same beyond reasonable doubt (H3) Yakubu v. Jauroyel (2015) 11 KLR (pt. 374) 3547; (2014) 11 NWLR (Pt.1418) 205

 

EVIDENCE - Land law - Identity of land - Proof - Appellants having failed to prove the identity of the land in dispute - CA was right when it found that their claim cannot succeed (H4) Addah v. Ubandawaki (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 183; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1458) 325

 

EVIDENCE - Land law - Sale - Agreement ­- The exhibits and respondent’s testimony on oath - Confirm that there is an agreement to sell the land - And further agreement that payment shall be by installments (H3) Ogundalu v. Macjob (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1021; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1460) 96

 

EVIDENCE - Land law - Title ­- Conflict - From the explanation given by PW2 - There is no contradiction amounting to a substantial disparagement of appellant and his witness (H1) Yakubu v. Jauroyel (2015) 11 KLR (pt. 374) 3547; (2014) 11 NWLR (Pt.1418) 205

 

EVIDENCE - Land law - Title - Proof - Means of - Ownership may be proved by traditional evidence - Production of document of title - Acts of ownership - Acts of long possession - And proof of possession of adjacent land (H1) Addah v. Ubandawaki (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 183; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1458) 325

 

EVIDENCE - Land law - Title - Root of - Proof - Where a person relies on traditional history as his root of title - He must plead same and lead evidence to establish it - Without any missing link (H2) Addah v. Ubandawaki (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 183; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1458) 325

 

EVIDENCE - Land law - Title - Smaller land - Court may grant declaration over smaller area than that claimed - If the evidence before the court justifies it (H4) Yakubu v. Jauroyel (2015) 11 KLR (pt. 374) 3547; (2014) 11 NWLR (Pt.1418) 205

 

EVIDENCE - Land law - Title - Smaller land - Where in a claim for title over a large area - Plaintiff succeeds in proving his claim for smaller area - Judgment should be given for the smaller area - Provided it is in dispute (H6) Ogundalu v. Macjob (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1021; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1460) 96

 

EVIDENCE - Leases - Validity - Approach made to renew the lease by original lessee and plaintiff was legally right - As no evidence existed that the lease had expired and remained unrenewed - Before it was assigned to plaintiff (H3) Briggs v. Chief Lands Officer Rivers State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2703; (2005) 12 NWLR (Pt.938) 59

 

EVIDENCE - Legal practitioners - Address - Weight - Counsel’s address assists the court but it is not evidence - As a case is won on credible evidence - And failure to address will not cause miscarriage of justice (H1) Mohammad v. State (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 101

 

EVIDENCE - Maritime - Judgment ­- Validity - Conclusion reached by the lower court was based on proper appraisal of evidence - Hence there is no cogent reason to warrant interference (H2) Oleksandr v. Lonestar Drilling Co. Ltd. (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1301; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1464) 337

 

EVIDENCE - Maritime law - Oil spillage - Damages - Proof - Damages awarded are not baseless - As evidence showed that some fishes died as a result of the spillage (H5) SPDC Nig. Ltd. v. Anaro (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2281; (2015) 12 NWLR (Pt.1472) 122

 

EVIDENCE - Material facts - Contradictions in - Where conflicts exist in material facts - The same must be explained to satisfaction of court - Otherwise court cannot speculate on explanations not supported by evidence (H4) Princewill v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2801; (1994) 6 NWLR (Pt.353) 703

 

EVIDENCE - Murder - Actus reus - Proof - Credible evidence adduced by PW1 - Who was the only direct eye witness to the incident - Is sufficient proof that act of appellant caused the death (H2) Ali v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1611; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 1

 

EVIDENCE - Murder - Confession - Veracity of - From appellant’s positive account - Lower courts rightly resolved fact of the death of deceased - And that it was appellant’s gruesome act that caused it (H2) Iliyasu v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 559; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1469) 26

 

EVIDENCE - Murder - Contradiction - Contrary to contention of appellant - No material contradiction exists in evidence adduced by prosecution - To proof the murder case (H5) Maiyaki v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2735; (2008) 15 NWLR (Pt.1109) 173

 

EVIDENCE - Murder - Conviction - Circumstantial evidence - Accused can be convicted of murder - Where there is cogent and compelling circumstantial evidence - To the fact that he killed the victim (H1) Jua v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2873; (2010) 4 NWLR (Pt.1184) 217

 

EVIDENCE - Murder - Conviction - Circumstantial evidence - Where there is no direct evidence - Court can draw inference from proved facts - Going by circumstances surrounding the cause of death (H8) Alo v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 331; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1464) 238

 

EVIDENCE - Murder - Conviction - Corpus delicti - Absence of - Corpus delicti is not produced in all cases to secure conviction - As accused can be convicted where there is evidence linking him with killing of deceased (H5) Jua v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2873; (2010) 4 NWLR (Pt.1184) 217

 

EVIDENCE - Murder - Credibility of evidence - Tainted witness - PW1 was not tainted witness but a witness of truth - Whose evidence was properly evaluated by trial court and affirmed by CA (H10) Ali v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1611; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 1

 

EVIDENCE - Murder - Death - Proof - From evidence of PW2 which corroborated that of PW1 - And the medical report presented by PW4 - There is no contradiction that the deceased is dead (H1) Ali v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1611; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 1

 

EVIDENCE - Murder - Ingredients - Proof - For prosecution to secure conviction - He must prove death of deceased - That the act of accused caused the death - And that the act was intentional (H4) Mbang v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3113; (2013) 7 NWLR (Pt.1352) 48

 

EVIDENCE - Murder - Ingredients - Proof - Prosecution has burden to prove that accused killed the deceased - That the killing was unlawful - And that it was intentional (H1) Abirifon v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3021; (2013) 13 NWLR (Pt.1372) 587

 

EVIDENCE - Murder - Ingredients - Proof - Prosecution must prove that the deceased died - That the death was unlawful - That act of accused caused the death - And that accused intended to cause death (H9) Alo v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 331; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1464) 238

 

EVIDENCE - Murder - Ingredients - Proof - Prosecution must prove that deceased died - And that his death was caused by accused - Who intended to kill or cause grievous bodily harm to deceased (H1) Iliyasu v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 559; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1469) 26

 

EVIDENCE - Murder - Ingredients - Proof - Prosecution must prove that the victim died - That the death resulted from act of accused - With intention that death or grievous bodily harm was probable effect (H1) Alao v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1411; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1488) 245

 

EVIDENCE - Murder - Intention - Dangerous weapon - Where such weapon was used - Court will infer that death was a probable - And not just a likely consequence of accused act (H3) Iliyasu v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 559; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1469) 26

 

EVIDENCE - Murder - Mens rea - Proof - The use of axe on very sensitive part of the body - Is a confirmation that appellant intended death as the natural consequence of his act (H3) Ali v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1611; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 1

 

EVIDENCE - Murder - Proof - Autopsy - Identity of deceased - Where prosecution identifies body of deceased via autopsy - Separate witness on issue of deceased’s identity is not vital (H2) Princewill v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2801; (1994) 6 NWLR (Pt.353) 703

 

EVIDENCE - Murder - Proof - Cause of death - Instrument used - It is enough that deceased was struck with a heavy weapon at the head - Hence it did not matter whether the instrument was an axe or machete (H11) Ali v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1611; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 1

 

EVIDENCE - Murder - Proof - Conviction - Absence of autopsy - Where evidence abound that deceased had died - But autopsy was not conducted - Accused may be convicted on circumstantial evidence (H3) Princewill v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2801; (1994) 6 NWLR (Pt.353) 703

 

EVIDENCE - Murder - Proof - Dangerous object - Where one stabs with a sharp object on vulnerable part of the body - He is deemed to have intended to cause bodily injury - Knowing that death could result (H2) Alao v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1411; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1488) 245

 

EVIDENCE - Murder - Proof - Date of death - Contained in the charge cannot be presumed - As it is an ingredient of the charge to be proved beyond reasonable doubt (H3) Zubairu v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1919; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1486) 504

 

EVIDENCE - Murder - Proof - Doctrine of last seen - In absence of explanation as to cause of death - A person last seen with deceased bears full responsibility for his death (H6) Iliyasu v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 559; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1469) 26

 

EVIDENCE - Murder - Proof - Evidence reveal that appellant certainly knew so much about the death of deceased - And to these facts he did confess in his statement (H6) Alo v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 331; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1464) 238

 

EVIDENCE - Murder - Proof - Exception - No matter the reckless conduct of accused - So long as the killing that resulted from his act was not intended - The act would not constitute murder (H2) Oketaolegun v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2531; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1477) 538

 

EVIDENCE - Murder - Proof - For prosecution to secure a conviction - He must prove that deceased died - That the death was due to act of appellant - And that the act was intentional (H1) Maiyaki v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2735; (2008) 15 NWLR (Pt.1109) 173

 

EVIDENCE - Murder - Proof - From graphic accounts of exhibits F4 & F5 - None other than appellant as a party in criminis - Could possibly have killed the deceased (H8) Mbang v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3113; (2013) 7 NWLR (Pt.1352) 48

 

EVIDENCE - Murder - Proof - Identity of deceased - Where evidence of autopsy is called - Failure to identify body of deceased is fatal - Save there is cogent evidence identifying deceased as killed by appellant (H1) Princewill v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2801; (1994) 6 NWLR (Pt.353) 703

 

EVIDENCE - Murder - Proof - Ingredients - Prosecution must prove that the deceased had died - That act of the accused caused the death - And that the act was done with intention to cause death (H1) Akinlolu v. State (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3601; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1497) 503

 

EVIDENCE - Murder - Proof - Means of - Murder can be proved by confession of accused - Direct evidence - Or by circumstantial evidence (H2) Abirifon v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3021; (2013) 13 NWLR (Pt.1372) 587

 

EVIDENCE - Murder - Proof - Medical report - Is needed in this circumstance to identify body of the deceased - As the death did not occur instantly after injury was inflicted (H4) Zubairu v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1919; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1486) 504

 

EVIDENCE - Murder - Proof - Standard of - To secure conviction for murder - Prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt - That the death of deceased was caused directly or indirectly by act of accused (H5) Princewill v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2801; (1994) 6 NWLR (Pt.353) 703

 

EVIDENCE - Murder - Witnesses related to deceased - Nkebisi v. State - Such relationship does not disqualify them as prosecution witnesses - As what is vital is their credibility (H9) Ali v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1611; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 1

 

EVIDENCE - Oral evidence - Admissibility - If oral evidence given in witness box is unchallenged - It must be accepted as establishing the facts therein stated (H11) Kayih v. Yilbuk (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 625; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 26

 

EVIDENCE - Pleadings - Averments - Not supported by evidence - Averments do not speak for the pleader without supporting evidence - Unless the adversary admits them (H6) Omisore v. Aregbesola (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1821; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1482) 205

 

EVIDENCE - Pleadings - Binding nature - In view of the state of the pleadings and evidence adduced - CA rightly held that allegation relating to murder was baseless - And that trial court’s finding was perverse (H9) Kayih v. Yilbuk (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 625; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 26

 

EVIDENCE - Pleadings - Binding nature of - Evidence led by a party which conflicts with his pleadings - Goes to no issue and should be discountenanced - As court and parties are bound by the pleadings (H5) Odom v. PDP (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 677; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1456) 527

 

EVIDENCE - Pleadings - Contradictions - Parties and courts are bound by pleadings - And any evidence at variance with pleadings must be disregarded by court (H6) Addah v. Ubandawaki (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 183; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1458) 325

 

EVIDENCE - Pleadings - Defence - Reply - Where defendant avers to a fact in statement of defence - And plaintiff fails to file a reply - Plaintiff may lead evidence to deny the averment in the statement of defence (H2) Ogundalu v. Macjob (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1021; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1460) 96

 

EVIDENCE - Pleadings - Issue - Court proceeds on trial on issues in pleadings - But where party fails to call evidence in support of his issues - Court may resolve such issues against the defaulting party (H8) Unity Life & Fire Insurance Ltd. v. Int’l Bank of W. Africa (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2821; (2001) 7 NWLR (Pt.713) 610

 

EVIDENCE - Presumption - Courts - Records - Regularity of - Records of court are presumed to be correct - Until they are successfully impugned (H2) Nobis-Elendu v. INEC (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 1981; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1485) 197

 

EVIDENCE - Prima facie case - Proof - Facts alleged against appellant discloses a prima facie case - That if not contradicted and if believed - Will be sufficient to prove the case against him (H1) Dariye v. FRN (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 529; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1467) 325

 

EVIDENCE - Production - Crime - Methods exist to compel production of material evidence - It is only when such are employed and opponent fails to comply - That withholding of evidence arises (H6) Busari v. State (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 53; (2015) 5 NWLR (Pt.1452) 343

 

EVIDENCE - Proof - Burden on accused - Although no burden is on accused to prove his innocence - But where there is presumption of guilty intent - Burden on accused is discharged on balance of probabilities (H3) Mbang v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3113; (2013) 7 NWLR (Pt.1352) 48

 

EVIDENCE - Proof - Evidence Act s. 149(a) - Import of - The subsection does not provide that particular witness must be called - Rather it proposes that particular evidence should be called (H4) Jua v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2873; (2010) 4 NWLR (Pt.1184) 217

 

EVIDENCE - Proof - Forensic evidence - Where exhibits point unequivocally to guilt of accused - Forensic is not necessary and accused can be convicted of the offence (H3) Jua v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2873; (2010) 4 NWLR (Pt.1184) 217

 

EVIDENCE - Proof - Land law - Title - Declaratory relief - Will not be conferred on appellants simply upon their pleadings - As there is no evidence tracing their history to their original ancestors (H3) Addah v. Ubandawaki (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 183; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1458) 325

 

EVIDENCE - Proof - Material witness - Prosecution must call all vital witnesses - Failure to so do will be fatal to its case - Which cannot be proved beyond reasonable doubt (H6) Sale v. State (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3679; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 392

 

EVIDENCE - Proof - Number of witnesses - Prosecution’s duty is to produce evidence to prove its case - And not production of witnesses not necessary to establish its case (H9) Mbang v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3113; (2013) 7 NWLR (Pt.1352) 48

 

EVIDENCE - Proof - Prima facie case - Is found to have been established where prosecution - Has proved the essential elements of the offence - And its evidence has not been discredited (H1) Uzoagba v. COP (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3143

 

EVIDENCE - Proof - Standard of - Onus is on prosecution to prove guilt of accused beyond reasonable doubt - And there is no onus on accused to establish his innocence (H2) Mbang v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3113; (2013) 7 NWLR (Pt.1352) 48

 

EVIDENCE - Proof - Standard of - Required is not proof beyond any shadow of doubt - But proof beyond reasonable doubt - Which connotes sufficiency of evidence against accused person (H2) Akinlolu v. State (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3601; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1497) 503

 

EVIDENCE - Provocation - Conditions - Accused must clearly state the facts - Show that the provocation deprived him of self control - And must show a proportionate retaliation (H4) Edoko v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 379; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1465) 454

 

EVIDENCE - Public document - Admissibility - Evidence Act ss. 111 & 112 - For the admissibility of exhibits E, 1, 2 & 3 - There must be certified true copy of each of them (H10) Kayih v. Yilbuk (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 625; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 26

 

EVIDENCE - Public document - Admissibility - Only duly certified copies of the documents are admissible - Where the parties do not intend to produce their originals (H10) Omisore v. Aregbesola (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1821; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1482) 205

 

EVIDENCE - Rape - Ingredients - Proof - Prosecution must prove that accused had sex with prosecutrix - That it was done without her consent - That she was not wife of accused - And that there was penetration (H2) Adonike v. State (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 11; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1458) 237

 

EVIDENCE - Rape - Proof - Corroboration - Evidence from PW3 and exhibit A support case of PW1 that she was violated by appellant - Hence the lower courts were right that both evidence confirm that of PW1 (H3) Adonike v. State (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 11; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1458) 237

 

EVIDENCE - Robbery - Conviction - Even if Exhibit E was expunged from the record - There was still evidence to find guilt of robbery - Hence appellant was rightly convicted for robbery (H1) Pius v. State (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1053; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1459) 628

 

EVIDENCE - Self defence - Conditions CC s. 286 - For the defence to avail an accused - There must be an unlawful assault - Which was not provoked by the accused (H3) Edoko v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 379; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1465) 454

 

EVIDENCE - Stealing - Proof - Prosecution must prove inter alia that the thing stolen is capable of being stolen - That accused has intention to permanently deprive the owner of the thing (H1) Oyebanji v. State (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2255; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1479) 270

 

EVIDENCE - Tainted witness - As no attempt was made to show the falsity of trial court’s findings - CA affirmation that PW2 is not to be classified as tainted witness cannot be faulted (H3) Akinlolu v. State (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3601; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1497) 503

 

EVIDENCE - Tainted witness - Where a witness is said to be tainted - Court must warn itself before admitting his evidence - And if he is an accomplice - His evidence requires corroboration (H2) Pius v. State (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1053; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1459) 628

 

EVIDENCE - Tendering of - Qualification - PW1 being an undisputed narcotic agent - CA rightly held that he was eminently qualified to tender Exhibit 4 (H7) Blessing v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1653; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 1

 

EVIDENCE - Trial - Prima facie case - CPC ss. 158 & 159 - As prima facie case is found established against appellants - The case is remitted to the trial Magistrate Court for conclusion (H2) Uzoagba v. COP (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3143

 

EVIDENCE - Trial within trial - Purpose and time - Essence of conducting the mini trial is to test voluntariness of confession - And this is done at the tendering of the confession (H6) Mbang v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3113; (2013) 7 NWLR (Pt.1352) 48

 

EVIDENCE - Undefended suits - Defence - Affidavit in support - Of notice of intention to defend must disclose facts - Which throw some doubt on plaintiff’s case (H8) Wema Securities & Finance Plc. v. Nig. Agric. Insu. Corp. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2557; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 93

 

EVIDENCE - University - Confession - Objection - 3rd accused being a University graduate - Ought to know the import of the claim that a statement was made involuntarily (H1) FRN v. Borishade (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 81; (2015) 5 NWLR (Pt.1451) 155

 

EVIDENCE - Withholding of - It is presumed in this case - That evidence of police investigation and medical report - Were deliberately withheld by prosecution - Because if produced they would adversely affect its case (H2) Zubairu v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1919; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1486) 504

 

EVIDENCE - Withholding of - Presumption - EA 2011 s. 167(d) - Evidence which could be and is not produced - Is presumed to be unfavourable to the person who withholds it (H7) Sale v. State (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3679; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 392

 

FAIR HEARING - Adjournment - Application - Hearing & ruling - Every of such application whether in writing or orally - Must be heard on the merits - And decided upon before proceeding further with the case (H1) Abah v. Monday (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1569; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1480) 569

 

FAIR HEARING - Appeals - Concurrent findings - Fair hearing - Lower courts findings that affected appellants’ right to fair hearing are perverse - Thus the decisions cannot persist and are set aside (H6) Akpamgbo-Okadigbo v. Chidi (1) (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 953; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 124

 

FAIR HEARING - Appeals ­- Dismissal - Legal practitioner - Mistake of - Dismissal of appellant’s appeal based on the inadvertence of his counsel - Is a denial of right to be heard on the merit (H2) Abah v. Monday (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1569; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1480) 569

 

FAIR HEARING - Appeals - Hearing notice - CA rightly proceeded with the matter - Having established that appellant was duly served but chose to be absent - Hence he cannot complain of breach of fair hearing (H1) Ogwe v. Inspector General Police (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 499; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1459) 505

 

FAIR HEARING - Breach - Allegation of - A party must be heard before case against him is determined - And once he can satisfy court that his right to fair hearing was infringed - He is entitled to remedy (H5) Assams v. Ararume (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3629; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1493) 368

 

FAIR HEARING - Breach - Allegation of - Appellants who participated fully in the proceedings of 3rd respondent - Cannot now complain of denial of fair hearing (H6) Onyekwuluje v. Benue State Govt. (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2043; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 40

 

FAIR HEARING - Breach - Allegation of - Bias against the trial court was uncalled for - As appellant was given adequate opportunity to be heard - And was heard in defence of the charge against him (H11) Okanlawon v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2431; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 445

 

FAIR HEARING - Breach - Allegation of concealment of appellant’s statement is unfounded - As prosecution adduced evidence it felt sufficient to prove its case (H5) Busari v. State (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 53; (2015) 5 NWLR (Pt.1452) 343

 

FAIR HEARING - Breach - Effect - Decision of CA arising from the issue raised suo motu - And without hearing the parties is a nullity - For being a breach of constitutional right to fair hearing (H2) Ominiyi v. Alabi (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 711; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1456) 572

 

FAIR HEARING - Charges - Arraignment - Fair hearing - Reading and explanation of charge must be in language spoken by accused - So as to ensure his right to fair hearing enshrined in 1999 Constitution s. 36(6) (H3) Mohammed v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 439

 

FAIR HEARING - Charges - Language of - 1999 Constitution s. 6(a) - Every person charged with an offence - Shall be informed promptly in language he understands and in details - Of nature of the offence (H1) Ibrahim v. State (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 995; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1469) 164

 

FAIR HEARING - Courts - Issue - Suo motu raising - Court is not entitled to raise an issue suo motu - And decide on it without affording parties opportunity to be heard (H1) Ominiyi v. Alabi (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 711; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1456) 572

 

FAIR HEARING - Courts - Issues - Suo motu raising - Court should not raise a point suo motu - And proceed to resolve same without hearing the parties - Especially party that will be adversely affected by the issue (H2) Olaolu v. Federal Republic of Nigeria (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1797

 

FAIR HEARING - Courts - Justice - Upholding of - Court being an impartial arbitrator - Must always consider both sides of a case before coming to a conclusion - As to do otherwise will result in grave injustice (H4) Kabirikim v. Emefor (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2907; (2009) 14 NWLR (Pt.1162) 602

 

FAIR HEARING - Elections - Breach - Reliefs granted to 1st to 17th respondents in absence of appellants - Is in breach of right to fair hearing of the latter - Hence the proceedings being perverse is set aside (H3) Akpamgbo-Okadigbo v. Chidi (1) (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 953; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 124

 

FAIR HEARING - Fundamental rights - Public document - Attachment of -Though words used in O. 3 r. 1 of the Rules are discretionary - There is still need to attach the proceedings - To arrive at a fair decision (H1) Onyekwuluje v. Benue State Govt. (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2043; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 40

 

FAIR HEARING - Motions - Consideration of - All applications properly brought before court must be heard - As any breach will nullify the proceedings (H2) Odedo v. PDP (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2007

 

FAIR HEARING - Provision of facilities - Must be afforded to accused to aid in preparation of his defence - Otherwise it will amount to violation of fair hearing or fair trial (H1) Okoye v. Commissioner of Police (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1493; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1488) 276

 

FAIR HEARING - Public Officers Protection Act - Defence - A person cannot be said to have been given fair hearing - If he is not allowed to rely on the provisions of an Act of parliament as defence (H2) Sylva v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1067; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1486) 576

 

FAIR HEARING - Trial - Time - Robbery & Firearms Act s. 12(6) - Although there is right to fair hearing for accused - Where delay is occasioned before arraignment - The same will not invalidate the trial (H1) Mohammed v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 439

 

FAMILY LAW - Land law - Variation order - CA rightly varied the decision of the trial customary court - Rather than reversing same - For this was done in the general interest of the family (H5) Jitte v. Okpulor (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3649; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1497) 542

 

FIREARMS - Conspiracy - Proof - Apart from appellant’s presence at the premises - No evidence exists to show that he agreed with co accused to store the firearms (H3) Roda v. FRN (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 121; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1468) 427

 

FOREIGN TRIP - Appeals - Notice of - Filing - Applicant relying on absence due to foreign trip - Should inter alia show that he owns a valid passport - And a visa admitting him to the country of visit (H1) Adigwe v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1381; (2015) 18 NWLR (Pt.1490) 105

 

FRAUD - Actions - Allegation of - Proof - Evidence Act s. 135(1) - Allegation of fraud and conspiracy on which 1st appellant based his case - Has to be proved beyond reasonable doubt (H2) ACN v. INEC (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3031; (2013) 13 NWLR (Pt.1370) 161

 

FRAUD - Company - Lifting the veil - Court will not allow a party to use its company as cover to defraud an innocent person - Who entered into lawful contract with it (H2) Oyebanji v. State (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2255; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1479) 270

 

FRAUD - Misappropriation of funds - Proof - Relationship between the parties is not merely contractual - As appellant’s unlawful appropriation of money paid to him - Involves a criminal act (H3) Oyebanji v. State (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2255; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1479) 270

 

FRAUD - Proof - Allegation of 1st respondent that Exhibit 1 was fraudulently obtained is of no moment - As he failed to prove same beyond reasonable doubt (H3) Yakubu v. Jauroyel (2015) 11 KLR (pt. 374) 3547; (2014) 11 NWLR (Pt.1418) 205

 

FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS - Enforcement - Jurisdiction - Right of action accrued to respondent to seek redress in FHC - Over malicious prosecution by appellants’ police officers (H1) CBN v. Okojie (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2149; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1479) 231

 

FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS - Enforcement - Unchallenged evidence - Of respondent that he was unlawfully arrested and prosecuted - Is credible and compelling (H3) CBN v. Okojie (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2149; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1479) 231

 

FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS - Pleadings - Averments - Not supported by evidence - Absence of evidence to establish the legality of respondent’s arrest - Renders the arrest unlawful (H2) CBN v. Okojie (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2149; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1479) 231

 

FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS - Public document - Attachment of -Though words used in O. 3 r. 1 of the Rules are discretionary - There is still need to attach the proceedings - To arrive at a fair decision (H1) Onyekwuluje v. Benue State Govt. (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2043; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 40

 

GOVERNMENT - Elections - LG chairmen - Expired tenure - Since tenure of appellants have been spent - There cannot be any benefit accruing to them - As the res had finished and became extinct (H3) Ogbolosingha v. Bayelsa S.I.E.C. (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 461; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1455) 311

 

GOVERNMENT - Elections - LG chairmen - Oath of office - Significance of -Subscription to the oath is used for purpose of computing tenure of office - And for entering into office (H6) Ogbolosingha v. Bayelsa S.I.E.C. (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 461; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1455) 311

 

GOVERNMENT - Elections - LG chairmen - Tenure - Duration of - Three years period provided in the LG Law s. 27(3)(a) is immutable - And no political party can elongate the prescribed tenure (H5) Ogbolosingha v. Bayelsa S.I.E.C. (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 461; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1455) 311

 

IDENTIFICATION PARADE - Armed robbery - Failure to conduct - Absence of conducting the parade - As well as failure to report the incident to Police timeously - Cast doubts on prosecution’s case (H3) Sale v. State (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3679; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 392

 

IDENTIFICATION PARADE - Armed robbery - Identification parade - Conduct of - It is essential when there is dispute as to identity of accused - But where no dispute exists - There will be no need for the parade (H3) Okanlawon v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2431; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 445

 

IDENTIFICATION PARADE - Armed robbery - Proof - Appellant cannot be said to have been identified by evidence of PW2 - As the trial court did not weigh the evidence - To prevent mistaken identity (H9) Sale v. State (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3679; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 392

 

IDENTIFICATION PARADE - Evidence - Weight - To guard against cases of mistaken identity - Court must consider circumstances in which eye witness saw suspect - Length of time witness saw suspect (H5) Sale v. State (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3679; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 392

 

IDENTIFICATION PARADE - Issue - Determination of - Identification of accused is only relevant - Where same is an issue before trial court - Otherwise court is not expected to dwell on it (H1) Fabiyi v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2349; (2015) 18 NWLR (Pt.1490) 80

 

IDENTIFICATION PARADE - Necessity of - It is a must for conviction where victim did not know accused before the offence - Where victim was confronted by accused for a very short time (H4) Sale v. State (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3679; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 392

 

INJUNCTIONS - Actions - Academic issue - Injunction is granted to restrain a threatened wrong to a right - But cannot be granted in the circumstance - As what is urged to be preserved no longer exist (H8) Odom v. PDP (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 677; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1456) 527

 

INJUNCTIONS - Elections - Action - Mandatory injunction - 1st to 5th respondents’ quest for the injunction in respect of election matter - Filed at HC instead of election tribunal - Is not maintainable in law (H3) Akpamgbo-Okadigbo v. Chidi (2) (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 759; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 124

 

INJUNCTIONS - Elections - Primaries - Relief - The injunctive relief sought against 2nd respondent cannot be made - As 1st respondent can no longer submit appellants’ name as the party’s candidate (H3) Ugwu v. PDP (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 731; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1459) 478

 

INJUNCTIONS - Property law - Trespass - Injunction - Order of injunction granted is of a consequential nature - Made to protect plaintiff against 3rd defendant - Who is now a trespasser (H2) Briggs v. Chief Lands Officer Rivers State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2703; (2005) 12 NWLR (Pt.938) 59

 

INSURANCE - Claim - Jurisdiction - To entertain claim based on simple contract of insurance - Is not vested exclusively on FHC - Rather the jurisdiction is vested on High Courts of the States (H2) Sun Insu. Nig. Plc. v. Umez Eng. Const. Co Ltd. (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2319; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1471) 576

 

INTERESTS - Claim of - Where interest is claimed as a matter of right - Proper practice is to claim entitlement to it on the writ - And plead facts which show such entitlement in statement of claim (H10) Wema Securities & Finance Plc. v. Nig. Agric. Insu. Corp. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2557; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 93

 

INTERNATIONAL LAW - Foreign trip - Notice of appeal - Filing - Applicant relying on absence due to foreign trip - Should inter alia show that he owns a valid passport - And a visa admitting him to the country of visit (H1) Adigwe v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1381; (2015) 18 NWLR (Pt.1490) 105

 

JUDGMENTS - Appeals - Dismissal - Subsequent order - Validity of - Having earlier dismissed respondents’ appeal - CA became functus officio - And as such its latter order for extension of time - Was made in error (H2) Dakan v. Asalu (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1691; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 47

 

JUDGMENTS - Appeals - Evaluation - Interference - Judgment of trial court on matters of credibility is binding - Hence CA was in error when it expunged exhibit AX from the records (H4) FRN v. Borishade (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 81; (2015) 5 NWLR (Pt.1451) 155

 

JUDGMENTS - Appeals - Ground - Issue - Formulation - Obiter dictum - The comment by CA is obiter dictum - Which cannot be the basis for raising ground of appeal - From which an issue can be framed (H3) APC v. PDP (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1179; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1481) 1

 

JUDGMENTS - Appeals - Issue - Bordering on defect in the notice of appeal was settled to finality - And the only option open to a dissatisfied party - Is to appeal against it (H2) Michael v. Bank of the North (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1711; (2015) 12 NWLR (Pt.1473) 370

 

JUDGMENTS - Courts - Customary courts - Parties - To ascertain capacity in which a party initiates action in the court - The whole proceedings must be looked into - And broad interpretation placed on the judgment (H2) Jitte v. Okpulor (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3649; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1497) 542

 

JUDGMENTS - Courts - Decision - Functus officio - Registrar’s statement on issue of service of processes - Is not a decision of CA for which it became functus officio and could not reopen it (H1) Ihedioha v. Okorocha (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3287; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1492) 147

 

JUDGMENTS - Courts - Discretion - Exercise of - Conditions - Where applicant prays for exercise of discretion - He must place before court sufficient materials - To be relied upon in granting his application (H2) Adigwe v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1381; (2015) 18 NWLR (Pt.1490) 105

 

JUDGMENTS - Courts - Issue - Suo motu raising - Court is not entitled to raise an issue suo motu - And decide on it without affording parties opportunity to be heard (H1) Ominiyi v. Alabi (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 711; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1456) 572

 

JUDGMENTS - Declaratory judgment - Meaning - Is one that proclaims existence of legal relationship - But does not contain any order which may be enforced (H1) Iragbiji v. Oyewole (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3099; (2013) 13 NWLR (Pt.1372) 566

 

JUDGMENTS - Election petitions - Ground - Omoworare v. Omisore - Appellant having based its petition on impeachment of 2nd respondent - Decision of CA in the case law was rightly applied (H4) APC v. PDP (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1179; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1481) 1

 

JUDGMENTS - Election petitions - Validity - Res judicata - As judgment of trial Tribunal is valid and not set aside - Appellant cannot appeal on same subject matter without his political party (H2) Agbaje v. INEC (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3223; (2016) 4 NWLR (Pt.1501) 151

 

JUDGMENTS - Executory judgment - Meaning - Is one that states the respective rights of parties - And also orders defendant to act in a particular way - Or refrain from interfering with plaintiff’s rights (H2) Iragbiji v. Oyewole (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3099; (2013) 13 NWLR (Pt.1372) 566

 

JUDGMENTS - Fair hearing - Breach - Effect - Decision of CA arising from the issue raised suo motu - And without hearing the parties is a nullity - For being a breach of constitutional right to fair hearing (H2) Ominiyi v. Alabi (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 711; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1456) 572

 

JUDGMENTS - Judicial precedents - Judgment of SC - Binding nature of -Decisions of SC on the same facts and legislation as those canvassed in this matter - Are binding on it and Court of Appeal (H3) Abegunde v. Ondo State H.A. (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1111; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1461) 314

 

JUDGMENTS - Jurisdiction - Absence of - Effect - Court either has jurisdiction to make certain orders or it does not - Where it lacks jurisdiction - Its pronouncement is of no legal effect (H4) Lafferi Nig. Ltd. v. Nal Merchant Bank Plc. (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1459; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1478) 64

 

JUDGMENTS - Jurisdiction - Determination - Court has jurisdiction to determine whether or not it has jurisdiction over a matter - And what it says may be profound - But not made per incuriam (H4) Sylva v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1067; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1486) 576

 

JUDGMENTS - Jurisdiction - Fundamentality of - Once raised issue of jurisdiction must be resolved before further step is taken - As any decision reached without jurisdiction is a nullity (H1) James v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 863; (2015) 12 NWLR (Pt.1474) 538

 

JUDGMENTS - Land law - Title - Smaller land - Where in a claim for title over a large area - Plaintiff succeeds in proving his claim for smaller area - Judgment should be given for the smaller area - Provided it is in dispute (H6) Ogundalu v. Macjob (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1021; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1460) 96

 

JUDGMENTS - Land law - Variation order - CA rightly varied the decision of the trial customary court - Rather than reversing same - For this was done in the general interest of the family (H5) Jitte v. Okpulor (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3649; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1497) 542

 

JUDGMENTS - Maritime - Validity of judgment - Conclusion reached by the lower court was based on proper appraisal of evidence - Hence there is no cogent reason to warrant interference (H2) Oleksandr v. Lonestar Drilling Co. Ltd. (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1301; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1464) 337

 

JUDGMENTS - Maritime law - Appeal - As there was no appeal against the finding of trial court - Issue as to who was responsible for appellants’ detention aboard the ship is settled (H1) Oleksandr v. Lonestar Drilling Co. Ltd. (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1301; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1464) 337

 

JUDGMENTS - Mistake - Weight - It is not every error in judgment that results in appeal being allowed - As it is only substantial error that occasioned miscarriage of justice - That warrants interference on appeal (H2) Compagnie Gen. De Geo. Nig. Ltd. v. Idorenyin (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1435; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 149

 

JUDGMENTS - Murder - Absence of accused - In the absence of allocutus before death sentence on appellant - Presumption is that he was not present in court - Which omission vitiated the trial (H2) Mohammad v. State (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 101

 

JUDGMENTS - Res judicata - Application - Conditions - For the plea to succeed - Parties must be the same in the two cases - Issues and subject matter must be the same - And judgment must be valid (H1) Omokhafe v. Esekhomo (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2783; (1993) 8 NWLR (Pt.309) 58

 

JUDGMENTS - Res judicata - Issue - Authenticity of the certificate having been settled to finality in the earlier case - Appellant is estopped from raising the issue in any other case (H7) APC v. PDP (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1179; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1481) 1

 

JUDGMENTS - Setting aside - Court can set aside its previous decision in cases of lack of jurisdiction - Or fraud which must be connected to everything adjudicated upon (H1) Michael v. Bank of the North (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1711; (2015) 12 NWLR (Pt.1473) 370

 

JUDGMENTS - Supreme Court - Amendment of judgment - SC becomes functus officio once it has decided a matter - But may amend its judgment where there is error - That materially affects the decision (H2) Enterprise Bank Ltd v. Aroso (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1783; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1476) 306

 

JUDGMENTS - Supreme Court - Binding nature of - Decisions of SC are binding on all courts - But where there are conflicts in the decisions - All courts are bound by its latest decision (H9) CBN v. Okojie (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2149; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1479) 231

 

JUDGMENTS - Supreme Court - Hearing - Limit - The court hears appeals from valid judgments of CA - And having held a part of CA’s decision as nullity - It has no jurisdiction to determine appellant’s issue (H3) Ominiyi v. Alabi (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 711; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1456) 572

 

JUDGMENTS - Supreme Court - Interference - Reason to invoke the jurisdiction of the court - To interfere with its judgment - Does not arise in this case (H3) Obi v. INEC (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2773; (2009) 18 NWLR (Pt.1172) 215

 

JUDGMENTS - Supreme Court - Judgment sum - Mistake in - Error made by SC in calculating the judgment sum is hereby deleted - And corrected to reflect the figures applicants are entitled to H3) Enterprise Bank Ltd v. Aroso (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1783; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1476) 306

 

JUDGMENTS - Supreme Court - Supremacy of - The court cannot sit on appeal over its judgment - And its power in appropriate cases to set aside its judgment - Does not amount to appellate jurisdiction (H1) Jev v. Iyortom (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 601; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1483) 484

 

JUDGMENTS - Supreme Court - Supremacy s. 287(1) 1999 Constitution - Earlier decision same day - That nullifies a lower court’s decision - Binds SC in a subsequent same day matter - That can no more be continuation of the nullified case (H4) Akpamgbo-Okadigbo v. Chidi (2) (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 759; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 124

 

JUDGMENTS - Supreme Court judgment - Amendment of - SC Rules O. 8 r. 16 - SC can in appropriate cases vary its judgment - To give effect to the judgment and in the interest of justice (H2) Jev v. Iyortom (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 601; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1483) 484

 

JUDGMENTS - Undefended suits - Notice of defence - Failure to file - Once defendant fails to deliver the notice and affidavit in support - Plaintiff is entitled to judgment (H3) Ifeanyichukwu Trad. Invest. Ven. Ltd. v. Onyesom Comm. Bank (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2183; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1487) 1

 

JUDGMENTS - Undefended suits - Objective of - It enables court to deal summarily with plaintiff’s claim and enter quick judgment - Once there is no defence on merit - Thereby saving time and cost (H1) Ifeanyichukwu Trad. Invest. Ven. Ltd. v. Onyesom Comm. Bank (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2183; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1487) 1

 

JUDGMENTS - Validity - CA judgment is in breach of Constitution 1999 s. 285(8) - As a judgment must show clear resolution of all issues - And end with ultimate verdict flowing from facts and law (H1) CPC v. Yuguda (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2859; (2013) 7 NWLR (Pt.1354) 450

 

JUDICIAL NOTICE - Accidents - Dangerous driving - Federal highway - Proof - The accident occurred along a road - Which was taken judicial notice of by both lower courts - As federal highway (H5) Adeyemo v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1591; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1485) 311

 

JUDICIAL NOTICE - Statutes - Public holidays - Public Holidays Act s. 1 recognizes only days listed in schedule to the Act as holidays - And courts are bound under Evidence Act 2011 s. 122(g) - To take judicial notice of such days (H5) Onyekwuluje v. Benue State Govt. (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2043; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 40

 

JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS - Actions - Determination - Basis - Cases are decided on their peculiar facts - And in the light of the applicable law - As every case is an authority for the facts which it decides (H2) Dankwambo v. Abubakar (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3237; (2016) 2 NWLR (Pt.1495) 157

 

JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS - Appeals - Notice of - Signing - Iwunze v. FRN - Notice in criminal appeal must be personally signed by appellant - Save where circumstances warrant his counsel to discharge such duty for him (H3) Ikechukwu v. FRN (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 845; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 1

 

JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS - Appeals - Upholding of - CA ought to be bound by its previous decision and that of SC - In respect of the issue the appeal raises (H3) Ogwe v. Inspector General Police (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 499; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1459) 505

 

JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS - Case law - Distinction - CA rightly refused to be bound by decision in Ibori v. Ogboru and Ogboru v. PCA - In view of disparities in their facts with that of present case (H8) Nyesom v. Peterside (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3361; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1492) 71

 

JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS - Chieftaincy matters - Actions - Limitation - Okere v. Amadi - By virtue of this decision of SC - No constitutional provision voids limitation period in chieftaincy matters (H7) Ibrahim v. Lawal (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 1949; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 490

 

JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS - Election petitions - Ground - Omoworare v. Omisore - Appellant having based its petition on impeachment of 2nd respondent - Decision of CA in the case law was rightly applied (H4) APC v. PDP (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1179; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1481) 1

 

JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS - Elections - Political party - Importance of - Amaechi v. INEC - Political parties and not candidates are the most important in an election (H1) Agbaje v. INEC (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3223; (2016) 4 NWLR (Pt.1501) 151

 

JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS - Evidence - Inconsistency rule - Application - Udo v. Queen - Inconsistency rule does not apply - To the previous confessions of an accused and his evidence in court (H3) Akinlolu v. State (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3601; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1497) 503

 

JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS - Judgment of SC - Binding nature of -Decisions of SC on the same facts and legislation as those canvassed in this matter - Are binding on it and Court of Appeal (H3) Abegunde v. Ondo State H.A. (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1111; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1461) 314

 

JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS - Maritime law - Fishery - Right of - Adeshina v. Lemonu - Fishing in tidal waters is a public right - Both under common law and natural law - And was not affected by Minerals Act s. 3(1) (H3) SPDC Nig. Ltd. v. Anaro (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2281; (2015) 12 NWLR (Pt.1472) 122

 

JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS - Maritime law - Oil spillage - Negligence - Rylands v. Fletcher - In respect of damages resulting from escape of oil waste - CA’s affirmation of trial court on res ipsa loquitur - And the rule in the case law cannot be faulted (H4) SPDC Nig. Ltd. v. Anaro (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2281; (2015) 12 NWLR (Pt.1472) 122

 

JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS - Murder - Evidence - Witnesses related to deceased - Nkebisi v. State - Such relationship does not disqualify them as prosecution witnesses - As what is vital is their credibility (H9) Ali v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1611; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 1

 

JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS - Stare decisis - Decisions of SC are binding on all courts - But where there are conflicts in the decisions - All courts are bound by its latest decision (H9) CBN v. Okojie (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2149; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1479) 231

 

JURISDICTION - Absence of - Effect - Court either has jurisdiction to make certain orders or it does not - Where it lacks jurisdiction - Its pronouncement is of no legal effect (H4) Lafferi Nig. Ltd. v. Nal Merchant Bank Plc. (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1459; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1478) 64

 

JURISDICTION - Action ­- Striking out - Where court has no jurisdiction to determine a case - It has no jurisdiction to dismiss it - It should strike out the matter (H3) Sylva v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1067; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1486) 576

 

JURISDICTION - Actions - Commencement - Limitation - Public Officers Protection Act - The plea can be raised by any of the respondents - And a successful defence under the Act ousts jurisdiction of court (H1) Sylva v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1067; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1486) 576

 

JURISDICTION - Actions - Statute bar - Suit of 1st to 4th respondents at trial court was statute barred - And had robbed the court of jurisdiction to entertain the matter (H8) Ibrahim v. Lawal (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 1949; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 490

 

JURISDICTION - Actions - Striking out - Effect - Miscarriage of justice is not occasioned - Since an order striking out the suit for non justiciability of subject matter - Has the same effect as dismissing the suit (H1) Ugwu v. PDP (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 731; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1459) 478

 

JURISDICTION - Actions - Striking out - Effect - Once a matter is struck out by a court - The court lacks jurisdiction to make any subsequent order on it (H13) S.P.D.C. Nig. Ltd. v. Agbara (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3707; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1496) 353

 

JURISDICTION - Administrative law - Commission of Inquiry - Function - Limit - The Commission of Inquiry appointed under s. 2(1) with terms of reference - Does not interfere with jurisdiction of High Court (H3) Kabirikim v. Emefor (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2907; (2009) 14 NWLR (Pt.1162) 602

 

JURISDICTION - Admiralty - Prior to promulgation of Decree no. 59 of 1991 - State HC can by virtue of unlimited jurisdiction conferred on it by Constitution 1979 - Exercise concurrent jurisdiction in respect of matters under FHC Act s. 7 (H1) SPDC Nig. Ltd. v. Anaro (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2281; (2015) 12 NWLR (Pt.1472) 122

 

JURISDICTION - Appeals - Court of Appeal - Jurisdiction of the court to entertain appeals is statutorily derived - And it is equally guided by its Rules (H1) Ikechukwu v. FRN (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 845; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 1

 

JURISDICTION - Appeals - Dismissal - Validity - Respondent’s oral application for dismissal is in order - And court has jurisdiction to strike out or dismiss appeal - Where appellant failed to prosecute same diligently (H4) Abah v. Monday (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1569; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1480) 569

 

JURISDICTION - Appeals - Dismissal - Want of diligent prosecution - Appeal dismissed on failure to file appellant’s brief is final - And the court has no jurisdiction to revive it (H1) Dakan v. Asalu (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1691; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 47

 

JURISDICTION - Appeals - Extension of time - Reasons - Exception - Where ground complains of absence of jurisdiction - Court would no longer consider the reasons adduced for the delay necessary (H4) Adigwe v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1381; (2015) 18 NWLR (Pt.1490) 105

 

JURISDICTION - Appeals - Extension of time - Reasons - Exception - Where grounds raise the issue of jurisdiction - Reasons for the delay in appealing within time cease to be relevant (H2) Lafferi Nig. Ltd. v. Nal Merchant Bank Plc. (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1459; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1478) 64

 

JURISDICTION - Appeals - Filing - Payment of fees - Where inadequate fees are paid - Court can order for the short fall to be paid - As the omission does not rob the court of its jurisdiction (H5) Ogwe v. Inspector General Police (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 499; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1459) 505

 

JURISDICTION - Appeals - Fresh issue - Party raising an issue for the first time must do so by leave of court - Save where the issue is on jurisdiction - Which is the foundation of adjudication (H4) Sakati v. Bako (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2085; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1480) 531

 

JURISDICTION - Appeals - Fresh issue of - Although a party must seek leave to raise fresh issue - But where issue is on jurisdiction - The same can be raised for the first time on appeal without leave (H2) Wema Securities & Finance Plc. v. Nig. Agric. Insu. Corp. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2557; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 93

 

JURISDICTION - Appeals - Ground - Leave - Appellants do not require leave to raise a ground - That the CA granted the injunction it did - When issue of jurisdiction has not been settled - As this is a question of law (H1) Soludo v. Osigbo (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2983; (2009) 18 NWLR (Pt.1173) 290

 

JURISDICTION - Appeals - Grounds - Competence of - By virtue of Constitution 1999 s. 233(2)(a) - Appeal will lie as of right to SC on ground 7 - Which questions the jurisdiction of CA to determine the suit (H3) Iragbiji v. Oyewole (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3099; (2013) 13 NWLR (Pt.1372) 566

 

JURISDICTION - Appeals - Having struck out appellants’ appeal for being incompetent - CA ceased to have jurisdiction over the matter before it (H5) Ihedioha v. Okorocha (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3287; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1492) 147

 

JURISDICTION - Appeals - Issue - Determination - Appellant’s issue 1 on lack of jurisdiction of trial Tribunal - Is enough to dispose off the appeal (H4) MPPP v. INEC (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3335

 

JURISDICTION - Appeals - Issues - Although CA has a duty to pronounce on all issues before it - But where the court decides that it lacks jurisdiction - It is unnecessary to consider other issues (H4) Ikechukwu v. FRN (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 845; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 1

 

JURISDICTION - Appeals - Jurisdiction - Fresh issue of - Can be raised for the first time in CA or SC - And there is no need to seek leave before raising it on appeal (H2) Compagnie Generale De Geopysique Nig. Ltd. v. Aminu (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 793; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1459) 577

 

JURISDICTION - Appeals - Notice - Competence of - It is the foundation of every appeal - Hence any defect therein will render the whole appeal incompetent - And appellate court will lack jurisdiction to entertain it (H1) Ikuepenikan v. State (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1273; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1465) 518

 

JURISDICTION - Appeals - Notice - Failure to sign - Notice must be signed personally by appellant in criminal appeals - Otherwise there is no competent appeal - And the court has no jurisdiction (H2) Ikuepenikan v. State (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1273; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1465) 518

 

JURISDICTION - Appeals - Notice of - Inadequate filing fees - Payment of inadequate filing fees can only make a process irregular - And not capable of affecting jurisdiction of the court (H7) S.P.D.C. Nig. Ltd. v. Agbara (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3707; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1496) 353

 

JURISDICTION - Appeals - Record - Binding nature of - Appellate court has no jurisdiction to read into record what it does not contain - As court must read and apply exact content of the record without more (H2) Ogwe v. Inspector General Police (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 499; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1459) 505

 

JURISDICTION - Appeals - Time limit - SC cannot invoke SC Act s. 22 to save the appeal - As CA by effluxion of time lacks jurisdiction - To adjudicate on the appeal (H2) CPC v. Yuguda (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2859; (2013) 7 NWLR (Pt.1354) 450

 

JURISDICTION - Chieftaincy matters - Court - Condition for the court to assume jurisdiction in the matter - Exists with the obvious complaints lodged which received no response (H6) Kayih v. Yilbuk (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 625; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 26

 

JURISDICTION - Constitution - Supremacy - State HC -Jurisdiction - In view of the supremacy of the Constitution - Any law which tends to limit jurisdiction of the court - Is null and void (H3) Kayih v. Yilbuk (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 625; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 26

 

JURISDICTION - Contracts - As the action is on simple contract - FHC cannot arrogate itself jurisdiction - Hence CA wrongfully held that trial court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the action (H4) Wema Securities & Finance Plc. v. Nig. Agric. Insu. Corp. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2557; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 93

 

JURISDICTION - Contracts - Privity of - Respondents had no ground to sue appellant under the lease agreement - As absence of locus standi deprived trial court of jurisdiction to entertain the matter (H2) Rebold Ind. Ltd. v. Magreola (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1349; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1461) 210

 

JURISDICTION - Court martial - Composition of - Defect in - Once a member is disqualified - Everything done by the court is a nullity - As the defect renders the court incompetent - And without jurisdiction (H1) Zakari v. Nigerian Army (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1533; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1487) 77

 

JURISDICTION - Court martial - Composition of - Objection - Failure to object to membership of an unqualified officer of the court - Does not bar the party to raise same objection bordering on jurisdiction on appeal (H2) Zakari v. Nigerian Army (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1533; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1487) 77

 

JURISDICTION - Court processes - Service - Importance of - Service of originating process is precondition to exercise of jurisdiction - As where there is no service - Subsequent proceedings are nullity (H2) Ihedioha v. Okorocha (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3287; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1492) 147

 

JURISDICTION - Court processes - Service - Jurisdiction - Where service is needed - Failure to effect same renders the proceedings void - As no court has jurisdiction where any of the parties was not served (H3) Compagnie Generale De Geopysique Nig. Ltd. v. Aminu (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 793; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1459) 577

 

JURISDICTION - Courts - Absence of jurisdiction - Once trial court lacks jurisdiction on a matter - Court of Appeal will have no jurisdiction to hear and determine the matter on the merit (H4) Wambai v. Donatus (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3163; (2014) 14 NWLR (Pt.1427) 223

 

JURISDICTION - Courts - Competence - Composition of court - Where there is defect in membership - Court is not properly constituted and it lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate - And any decision it reached is a nullity (H2) MPPP v. INEC (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3335

 

JURISDICTION - Courts - Exercise of - Conditions - The subject matter of the case must be within jurisdiction of the court - And no feature in the case must prevent court from exercising its jurisdiction (H3) Sun Insu. Nig. Plc. v. Umez Eng. Const. Co Ltd. (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2319; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1471) 576

 

JURISDICTION - Courts - Extent of - Exclusive jurisdiction of the court is tied to the listed items - And to others as may be conferred upon it by Act of the National Assembly (H3) Wema Securities & Finance Plc. v. Nig. Agric. Insu. Corp. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2557; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 93

 

JURISDICTION - Courts - Federal High Court - Jurisdiction - In considering issue of its jurisdiction - Status of the parties and subject matter of the claim must be looked at (H5) Wema Securities & Finance Plc. v. Nig. Agric. Insu. Corp. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2557; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 93

 

JURISDICTION - Courts - Parties - Joinder of - Is ordered where the party is aggrieved - To avoid multiplicity of suits - Completely deal with the suit - Ensure fair hearing and to avoid loss of jurisdiction (H4) Akpamgbo-Okadigbo v. Chidi (1) (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 953; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 124

 

JURISDICTION - Courts - State HC - Constitution 1999 s. 272(1) - The court has unlimited jurisdiction to hear and determine - Any civil proceeding in which the existence of legal right is in issue (H2) Kayih v. Yilbuk (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 625; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 26

 

JURISDICTION - Courts - State HC - Jurisdiction - Chieftaincy matter - Chiefs Law s. 3(2) that ousts unlimited jurisdiction of the court is null and void - Hence the court has jurisdiction to entertain the matter (H4) Kayih v. Yilbuk (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 625; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 26

 

JURISDICTION - Courts - Tribunal - Supervision of - Application - For superior court to prevent tribunal from exceeding its jurisdiction - Applicant must present facts necessary to justify grant of the order sought (H4) Onyekwuluje v. Benue State Govt. (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2043; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 40

 

JURISDICTION - Crime - Trial - Venue - As the key witnesses and appellant are resident within jurisdiction of the trial court - To move the trial to another location is an exercise in forum shopping (H4) Dariye v. FRN (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 529; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1467) 325

 

JURISDICTION - Criminal procedure - Trial - The appropriate means to determine in which jurisdiction to try accused - Is to identify what element of the offence occurred where (H2) Dariye v. FRN (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 529; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1467) 325

 

JURISDICTION - Determination - Basis - It is plaintiff’s claim that would be considered - And where suit is commenced by originating summons - Averments in affidavit are considered (H2) James v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 863; (2015) 12 NWLR (Pt.1474) 538

 

JURISDICTION - Determination - Court has jurisdiction to determine whether or not it has jurisdiction over a matter - And what it says may be profound - But not made per incuriam (H4) Sylva v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1067; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1486) 576

 

JURISDICTION - Determination of - Basis - Jurisdiction is determined by plaintiff’s claim - As endorsed in the writ of summons and statement of claim (H1) Sun Insu. Nig. Plc. v. Umez Eng. Const. Co Ltd. (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2319; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1471) 576

 

JURISDICTION - Election petitions - 1999 Constitution s. 285 - FHC lacks jurisdiction to entertain appellant’s suit - As the matter clearly belongs to Election Petition Tribunal (H1) ANPP v. Returning Officer Abia State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2855; (2007) 11 NWLR (Pt.1045) 431

 

JURISDICTION - Election petitions - Hearing - Time limit - The appeal is statute barred by virtue of Constitution 1999 s. 285(7) - Hence Supreme Court has no jurisdiction to entertain it (H3) ACN v. INEC (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3031; (2013) 13 NWLR (Pt.1370) 161

 

JURISDICTION - Election petitions - Nature - Election matters are sui generis unlike other civil matters - And jurisdiction to determine them is statutory - Hence common principles may not be applicable (H3) Lokpobiri v. Ogola (2015) 11 KLR (pt. 374) 3461; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 328

 

JURISDICTION - Election petitions - Nomination - Jurisdiction - After the conduct of an election - A person wishing to challenge result of the election on ground of nomination - Can do so at election tribunal under EA 2010 s. 138(1)(a) (H3) Wambai v. Donatus (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3163; (2014) 14 NWLR (Pt.1427) 223

 

JURISDICTION - Election petitions - Preelection - Jurisdiction - FHC - Concurrent jurisdiction conferred on FHC by Evidence Act in pre & post election matters - Is in addition to its exclusive jurisdiction in s. 251 of Constitution 1999 (H4) Lokpobiri v. Ogola (2015) 11 KLR (pt. 374) 3461; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 328

 

JURISDICTION - Elections - Gubernatorial - Jurisdiction - Proper forum to determine appellant’s challenge of the return of 3rd respondent - Is the Governorship Election Tribunal (H3) James v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 863; (2015) 12 NWLR (Pt.1474) 538

 

JURISDICTION - Elections - House of assembly - From the nature of the cause of action - 1st to 5th respondents’ claim can only be maintained as a petition filed at the election petition tribunal (H2) Akpamgbo-Okadigbo v. Chidi (2) (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 759; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 124

 

JURISDICTION - Elections - Preelection - Jurisdiction - Preelection matter filed prior to election subsists - And HC in which it was so instituted continues to have jurisdiction - Even after conduct of the election (H1) Wambai v. Donatus (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3163; (2014) 14 NWLR (Pt.1427) 223

 

JURISDICTION - Elections - Preelection - Where there is complaint about conduct of primaries - Court can by Electoral Act s. 87(9) - Examine if the election complied with the Act and constitution of the political party (H1) Akpamgbo-Okadigbo v. Chidi (1) (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 953; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 124

 

JURISDICTION - Elections - Primaries - Jurisdiction - Where dispute arises as to which of the primaries produced candidate for a political party - The matter is taken outside Electoral Act 2010 s. 87(4)(b)(ii), (c)(ii) & (9) (H2) Ugwu v. PDP (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 731; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1459) 478

 

JURISDICTION - Exclusive & concurrent jurisdiction - Distinction - Whereas the exclusive jurisdiction of a court is peculiar to it - Concurrent jurisdiction is common to two or more courts (H2) Lokpobiri v. Ogola (2015) 11 KLR (pt. 374) 3461; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 328

 

JURISDICTION - FHC - Criminal jurisdiction of - Is exercisable in the division within which offence was committed - But it can assume jurisdiction following inter alia an order of transfer (H1) Roda v. FRN (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 121; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1468) 427

 

JURISDICTION - FHC - Decision of Abuja division of the court to try offence that occurred in Kano - Which bears no relationship with the offence in Abuja - Is perverse (H4) Roda v. FRN (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 121; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1468) 427

 

JURISDICTION - Fundamental nature of - Court should first determine issue of jurisdiction - Before embarking on any proceeding for hearing on the merit (H4) Sun Insu. Nig. Plc. v. Umez Eng. Const. Co Ltd. (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2319; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1471) 576

 

JURISDICTION - Fundamental rights - Enforcement - Right of action accrued to respondent to seek redress in FHC - Over malicious prosecution by appellants’ police officers (H1) CBN v. Okojie (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2149; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1479) 231

 

JURISDICTION - Fundamentality of - It is a question of law that can be raised as fresh issue on appeal even in SC - And there is no need for leave before it is properly raised (H1) MPPP v. INEC (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3335

 

JURISDICTION - Fundamentality of - It is so fundamental that the absence of same renders any proceeding conducted - As null and void and without any legal effect whatsoever (H1) Kayih v. Yilbuk (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 625; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 26

 

JURISDICTION - Fundamentality of - Jurisdiction goes to root of adjudication process - As where court lacks jurisdiction - Any decision it reached is a nullity (H1) Lokpobiri v. Ogola (2015) 11 KLR (pt. 374) 3461; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 328

 

JURISDICTION - Fundamentality of - Once issue of jurisdiction is raised - All proceedings abate until resolved - As proceedings conducted without jurisdiction amount to nullity (H4) Iragbiji v. Oyewole (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3099; (2013) 13 NWLR (Pt.1372) 566

 

JURISDICTION - Fundamentality of - Once raised issue of jurisdiction must be resolved before further step is taken - As any decision reached without jurisdiction is a nullity (H1) James v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 863; (2015) 12 NWLR (Pt.1474) 538

 

JURISDICTION - Insurance - Claim - Jurisdiction - To entertain claim based on simple contract of insurance - Is not vested exclusively on FHC - Rather the jurisdiction is vested on High Courts of the States (H2) Sun Insu. Nig. Plc. v. Umez Eng. Const. Co Ltd. (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2319; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1471) 576

 

JURISDICTION - Issue - Time to raise - Challenge to jurisdiction of court can be raised at any stage of the trial - And even on appeal (H2) Omokhafe v. Esekhomo (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2783; (1993) 8 NWLR (Pt.309) 58

 

JURISDICTION - Issue of - Being a threshold matter - Jurisdiction can be raised at any stage of the proceedings - By any party to a dispute or even by court suo motu (H4) Ibrahim v. Lawal (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 1949; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 490

 

JURISDICTION - Issue of - When to raise - Question of jurisdiction can be raised at any time of the proceedings - Even for the first time in Supreme Court (H1) Hamzat v. Sanni (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 253; (2015) 5 NWLR (Pt.1453) 486

 

JURISDICTION - Judgments - Setting aside - Court can set aside its previous decision in cases of lack of jurisdiction - Or fraud which must be connected to everything adjudicated upon (H1) Michael v. Bank of the North (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1711; (2015) 12 NWLR (Pt.1473) 370

 

JURISDICTION - Locus standi - Fundamentality of - It is the legal capacity to institute proceedings in court - And if plaintiff does not have locus standi - Court would have no jurisdiction to entertain the suit (H4) Daniel v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 809; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1463) 113

 

JURISDICTION - Objection - Determination - Basis - In suits fought on pleadings - Objection is resolved by examining plaintiff’s claim - And in originating motion - Affidavit in support is considered (H1) Akpamgbo-Okadigbo v. Chidi (2) (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 759; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 124

 

JURISDICTION - Objection - Determination of - Basis - Where the objection is raised by motion supported by affidavit - The affidavit evidence and facts deposed to in opposition must be considered (H2) Roda v. FRN (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 121; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1468) 427

 

JURISDICTION - Res judicata - Plea - Condition - Party relying on the plea must establish inter alia that the parties and subject matter are the same - That the decision is valid and final - And that court has jurisdiction (H1) Ogbolosingha v. Bayelsa S.I.E.C. (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 461; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1455) 311

 

JURISDICTION - Rules of court - Non compliance - Effect - Every non compliance does not vitiate proceedings - But where court is robbed of jurisdiction - Processes and proceedings must be set aside (H3) Ihedioha v. Okorocha (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3287; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1492) 147

 

JURISDICTION - Rules of court - Non compliance with - Court will not abandon its jurisdiction because of non compliance - As the rules should not be means of compromising right of appeal (H3) Odom v. PDP (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 677; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1456) 527

 

JURISDICTION - Sources - Jurisdiction of Election Tribunal and Court of Appeal in respect of election petitions - Is derived from the Constitution 1999 (as amended) (H4) Dankwambo v. Abubakar (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3237; (2016) 2 NWLR (Pt.1495) 157

 

JURISDICTION - Sources of - Jurisdiction is a matter of law and is statutorily conferred - And neither the court nor parties can confer jurisdiction (H7) Odom v. PDP (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 677; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1456) 527

 

JURISDICTION - Sources of - No court can assume jurisdiction except it is statutorily endowed - As jurisdiction cannot be implied nor can it be conferred by agreement of parties (H5) Ibrahim v. Lawal (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 1949; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 490

 

JURISDICTION - Statutes - Interpretation - Rights of action - Courts must jealously guard their jurisdiction in protecting statutorily vested rights - If a provision of same statute appears to derogate from such rights (H5) Nobis-Elendu v. INEC (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 1981; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1485) 197

 

JURISDICTION - Supreme Court - Hearing - Limit - The court hears appeals from valid judgments of CA - And having held a part of CA’s decision as nullity - It has no jurisdiction to determine appellant’s issue (H3) Ominiyi v. Alabi (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 711; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1456) 572

 

JURISDICTION - Supreme Court - Judgment - Interference - Reason to invoke the jurisdiction of the court - To interfere with its judgment - Does not arise in this case (H3) Obi v. INEC (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2773; (2009) 18 NWLR (Pt.1172) 215

 

JURISDICTION - Supreme Court - Judgment - Supremacy of - The court cannot sit on appeal over its judgment - And its power in appropriate cases to set aside its judgment - Does not amount to appellate jurisdiction (H1) Jev v. Iyortom (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 601; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1483) 484

 

JURISDICTION - Tribunals - Decision - Mistake in - Provided that the mistake in decision of a tribunal was committed within its jurisdiction - Superior court exercising supervisory jurisdiction - Cannot readily interfere (H3) Onyekwuluje v. Benue State Govt. (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2043; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 40

 

JUSTICE - Actions - Striking out - Effect - Miscarriage of justice is not occasioned - Since an order striking out the suit for non justiciability of subject matter - Has the same effect as dismissing the suit (H1) Ugwu v. PDP (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 731; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1459) 478

 

JUSTICE - Adjournment - Application - Hearing & ruling - Every of such application whether in writing or orally - Must be heard on the merits - And decided upon before proceeding further with the case (H1) Abah v. Monday (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1569; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1480) 569

 

JUSTICE - Appeals - Concurrent findings - Interference - As there has been a violation of some principles of law and procedure - Which created a miscarriage of justice - SC can rightly intervene (H3) Zakari v. Nigerian Army (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1533; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1487) 77

 

JUSTICE - Appeals - Concurrent findings - Supreme Court does not interfere with such findings - Unless the findings are perverse - Or there was serious error which resulted in miscarriage of justice (H3) Owhoruke v. COP (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2235; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1483) 557

 

JUSTICE - Appeals - Concurrent findings - The findings of the lower courts arising from due considerations - And without miscarriage of justice - Are not to be interfered with (H2) Aji v. Chad Basin Dev. Auth. (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 937; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1486) 554

 

JUSTICE - Appeals - Court - Discretion - CA rightly determined discretion of trial court - And held that the same was improperly exercised - As it caused a miscarriage of justice to respondent (H6) Daniel v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1757; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 119

 

JUSTICE - Appeals - Document - Admissibility of - Where document is unlawfully admitted without objection at trial - Appellant can still object on appeal - Particularly where miscarriage of justice occurred (H5) Unity Life & Fire Insurance Ltd. v. Int’l Bank of W. Africa (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2821; (2001) 7 NWLR (Pt.713) 610

 

JUSTICE - Appeals - Notice - Multiple filing - The mere fact of filing multiple notices does not render the appeal incompetent - As 1st respondent relied on one of the notices - And has not disclosed any injury he suffered (H2) Yaki v. Bagudu (2015) 11 KLR (pt. 374) 3503; (2015) 18 NWLR (Pt.1491) 288

 

JUSTICE - Armed robbery - Proof - Failure in PW testimony - Non direction by trial court on effect of failure to name appellant - Occasioned a miscarriage of justice (H5) Ibrahim v. State (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 995; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1469) 164

 

JUSTICE - Court processes - Abuse - Features - It manifests in improper use of judicial process by party - To interfere with due administration of justice (H5) Lokpobiri v. Ogola (2015) 11 KLR (pt. 374) 3461; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 328

 

JUSTICE - Courts - Applications - Joint hearing - The procedure adopted by trial judge in hearing all applications jointly - Amounts to procedural expediency - Clearly within His Lordship’s powers (H6) Assams v. Ararume (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3629; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1493) 368

 

JUSTICE - Courts - Issues - Suo motu raising - Court can raise issue suo motu in the interest of justice - But it must invite parties to address it on such issue - Before basing its decision thereupon (H3) Odedo v. PDP (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2007

 

JUSTICE - Courts - Legislation - Interpretation - Courts - Interpretation - Justice - Court does not read provisions of enactment in a way to deny litigant access to justice - As court is guided by its rule in conduct of its business (H10) S.P.D.C. Nig. Ltd. v. Agbara (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3707; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1496) 353

 

JUSTICE - Courts - Powers - Purpose of - Inherent powers of court are products of Constitution and court itself - In its quest for substantial justice - Thereby ensuring that streams of justice remain pure (H1) Enterprise Bank Ltd v. Aroso (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1783; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1476) 306

 

JUSTICE - Courts - Upholding of - Court being an impartial arbitrator - Must always consider both sides of a case before coming to a conclusion - As to do otherwise will result in grave injustice (H4) Kabirikim v. Emefor (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2907; (2009) 14 NWLR (Pt.1162) 602

 

JUSTICE - Damages - Award - Double compensation - A person fully compensated under one head of damages for a particular injury - Cannot be awarded damages in respect of same injury under another head (H6) British Airways v. Atoyebi (2015) 11 KLR (pt. 374) 3425; (2014) 13 NWLR (Pt.1424) 253

 

JUSTICE - Documents - Admissibility - Objection - Appellant is to raise issue of non compliance with E.A. s. 57 - When the document was sought to be tendered - But having failed to object - No miscarriage of justice was suffered (H8) Blessing v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1653; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 1

 

JUSTICE - Evidence - Contradictions - Weight - Inconsistencies in evidence of PW1 are insignificant - And not substantial to have occasioned a miscarriage of justice (H6) Ali v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1611; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 1

 

JUSTICE - Evidence - Inadmissible evidence - Rejection of - Even where no objection is raised to its admission - Court is bound to reject inadmissible evidence - In the interest of justice (H1) Zubairu v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1919; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1486) 504

 

JUSTICE - Fair hearing - Consideration of - All applications properly brought before court must be heard - As any breach will nullify the proceedings (H2) Odedo v. PDP (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2007

 

JUSTICE - Judgment - Mistake - Weight - It is not every error in judgment that results in appeal being allowed - As it is only substantial error that occasioned miscarriage of justice - That warrants interference on appeal (H2) Compagnie Gen. De Geo. Nig. Ltd. v. Idorenyin (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1435; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 149

 

JUSTICE - Legal practitioners - Address - Weight - Counsel’s address assists the court but it is not evidence - As a case is won on credible evidence - And failure to address will not cause miscarriage of justice (H1) Mohammad v. State (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 101

 

JUSTICE - Maritime law - Fishing - Right of - Is limited to the portion within the borders of the communities - Hence miscarriage of justice was not occasioned by trial court’s interpretation of respondents’ claim (H1) Sakati v. Bako (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2085; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1480) 531

 

JUSTICE - Murder - Appeals - Fresh issue - Validity of - Although the issue of absence of appellant is fresh in SC - The court allowed same because of the criminal trial which attracted highest sentence (H3) Mohammad v. State (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 101

 

JUSTICE - Orders of court - Justice - Need to uphold - Pursuant to Plateau State HC Rules O. 47 r. 1 - Order made by CA did not make new case for the parties - Rather it was made to do justice (H14) Kayih v. Yilbuk (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 625; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 26

 

JUSTICE - Supreme Court judgment - Amendment of - SC Rules O. 8 r. 16 - SC can in appropriate cases vary its judgment - To give effect to the judgment and in the interest of justice (H2) Jev v. Iyortom (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 601; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1483) 484

 

JUSTICE - Undefended suits - Defence on merit - Transfer to general list - Where there is such defence - Justice demands that the matter be transferred to general cause list - For hearing on the pleadings (H9) Wema Securities & Finance Plc. v. Nig. Agric. Insu. Corp. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2557; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 93

 

LAND LAW - Appeals - Concurrent findings - Interference - The findings of title over the land verged red and blue are wrong - And hereby set aside for being perverse (H7) Ogundalu v. Macjob (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1021; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1460) 96

 

LAND LAW - Appeals - Court - Findings - As the trial court was constituted by men better placed to appreciate the matter - Its findings that respondent rightly proved his claim cannot be faulted (H3) Jitte v. Okpulor (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3649; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1497) 542

 

LAND LAW - Appeals - Variation order - CA rightly varied the decision of the trial customary court - Rather than reversing same - For this was done in the general interest of the family (H5) Jitte v. Okpulor (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3649; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1497) 542

 

LAND LAW - Certificate of Occupancy - Wrongful issuance of - Effect - Where issued as a result of inadvertence on part of official concerned - It cannot be said to be false and fraudulent (H2) Yakubu v. Jauroyel (2015) 11 KLR (pt. 374) 3547; (2014) 11 NWLR (Pt.1418) 205

 

LAND LAW - Courts - Pleadings ­- Binding nature of - A Judge should not give evidence on identity of land - As court should not set up for parties - A case different from the one in their pleadings (H5) Addah v. Ubandawaki (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 183; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1458) 325

 

LAND LAW - Fraud - Proof - Allegation of 1st respondent that Exhibit 1 was fraudulently obtained is of no moment - As he failed to prove same beyond reasonable doubt (H3) Yakubu v. Jauroyel (2015) 11 KLR (pt. 374) 3547; (2014) 11 NWLR (Pt.1418) 205

 

LAND LAW - Identity of land - Proof - Appellants having failed to prove the identity of the land in dispute - CA was right when it found that their claim cannot succeed (H4) Addah v. Ubandawaki (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 183; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1458) 325

 

LAND LAW - Lease - Forfeiture - Condition - Forfeiture on grounds of misconduct can only be ordered to determine a valid lease - And as there is no valid lease - The courts below wrongfully made the order (H5) Ogundalu v. Macjob (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1021; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1460) 96

 

LAND LAW - Reliefs - Extent of - Respondent did not only require the court to grant him declaration to title - He also claimed for disturbance of his possessory right (H4) Jitte v. Okpulor (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3649; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1497) 542

 

LAND LAW - Sale - Agreement ­- The exhibits and respondent’s testimony on oath - Confirm that there is an agreement to sell the land - And further agreement that payment shall be by installments (H3) Ogundalu v. Macjob (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1021; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1460) 96

 

LAND LAW - Sale - Yoruba Customary Law - The sale is not valid under the custom - As respondent still retains the legal title over the land - Since the purchase price was not fully paid (H4) Ogundalu v. Macjob (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1021; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1460) 96

 

LAND LAW - Specific performance - The sale of the land being invalid - Specific performance cannot be ordered as there is nothing to enforce (H8) Ogundalu v. Macjob (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1021; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1460) 96

 

LAND LAW - Title ­- Conflict - From the explanation given by PW2 - There is no contradiction amounting to a substantial disparagement of appellant and his witness (H1) Yakubu v. Jauroyel (2015) 11 KLR (pt. 374) 3547; (2014) 11 NWLR (Pt.1418) 205

 

LAND LAW - Title - Declaratory relief - Will not be conferred on appellants simply upon their pleadings - As there is no evidence tracing their history to their original ancestors (H3) Addah v. Ubandawaki (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 183; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1458) 325

 

LAND LAW - Title - Proof - Means of - Ownership may be proved by traditional evidence - Production of document of title - Acts of ownership - Acts of long possession - And proof of possession of adjacent land (H1) Addah v. Ubandawaki (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 183; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1458) 325

 

LAND LAW - Title - Root of - Proof - Where a person relies on traditional history as his root of title - He must plead same and lead evidence to establish it - Without any missing link (H2) Addah v. Ubandawaki (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 183; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1458) 325

 

LAND LAW - Title - Smaller land - Court may grant declaration over smaller area than that claimed - If the evidence before the court justifies it (H4) Yakubu v. Jauroyel (2015) 11 KLR (pt. 374) 3547; (2014) 11 NWLR (Pt.1418) 205

 

LAND LAW - Title - Smaller land - Where in a claim for title over a large area - Plaintiff succeeds in proving his claim for smaller area - Judgment should be given for the smaller area - Provided it is in dispute (H6) Ogundalu v. Macjob (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1021; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1460) 96

 

LAND LAW - Trespass - Locus standi - Having established interest in the matter - Respondent has locus to defend a case of trespass into his family land (H1) Jitte v. Okpulor (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3649; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1497) 542

 

LAND USE ACT - Certificate of Occupancy - Wrongful issuance of - Effect - Where issued as a result of inadvertence on part of official concerned - It cannot be said to be false and fraudulent (H2) Yakubu v. Jauroyel (2015) 11 KLR (pt. 374) 3547; (2014) 11 NWLR (Pt.1418) 205

 

LEASES - Jurisdiction - Contracts - Privity of - Respondents had no ground to sue appellant under the lease agreement - As absence of locus standi deprived trial court of jurisdiction to entertain the matter (H2) Rebold Ind. Ltd. v. Magreola (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1349; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1461) 210

 

LEASES - Land law - Forfeiture - Condition - Forfeiture on grounds of misconduct can only be ordered to determine a valid lease - And as there is no valid lease - The courts below wrongfully made the order (H5) Ogundalu v. Macjob (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1021; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1460) 96

 

LEASES - Validity - Approach made to renew the lease by original lessee and plaintiff was legally right - As no evidence existed that the lease had expired and remained unrenewed - Before it was assigned to plaintiff (H3) Briggs v. Chief Lands Officer Rivers State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2703; (2005) 12 NWLR (Pt.938) 59

 

LEGAL PRACTITIONERS - Address - Weight - Counsel’s address assists the court but it is not evidence - As a case is won on credible evidence - And failure to address will not cause miscarriage of justice (H1) Mohammad v. State (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 101

 

LEGAL PRACTITIONERS - Appeals - Extension of time - Reason - Applicant’s delay in filing his notice of appeal - Due to absence of his lead counsel - Cannot be excused - Since another counsel can competently file the notice (H3) Adigwe v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1381; (2015) 18 NWLR (Pt.1490) 105

 

LEGAL PRACTITIONERS - Appeals - Record - Completeness of - It is counsel’s duty to ensure that record is complete - And a party cannot complain if a ground is not considered - Since he had opportunity to regularize the record (H4) Michael v. Bank of the North (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1711; (2015) 12 NWLR (Pt.1473) 370

 

LEGAL PRACTITIONERS - Brief - Conduct of - When counsel is briefed by a party - He is empowered to do those things which the party is supposed to do - Except where the law demands otherwise (H3) Abah v. Monday (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1569; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1480) 569

 

LEGAL PRACTITIONERS - Court process - Signing of - Appellant’s statements of claim on which evidence was led were nullity - Same having been signed by person not entitled to practice as barrister and solicitor (H2) Hamzat v. Sanni (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 253; (2015) 5 NWLR (Pt.1453) 486

 

LEGAL PRACTITIONERS - Courts - Admissibility of - Objection - Where inadmissible evidence is tendered - And party or counsel on other side fails to object - Court in civil cases may and in criminal cases must reject such evidence (H7) Unity Life & Fire Insurance Ltd. v. Int’l Bank of W. Africa (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2821; (2001) 7 NWLR (Pt.713) 610

 

LEGAL PRACTITIONERS - Documents - Admissibility - Letters of counsel - By virtue of the correspondence not marked without prejudice - Appellants should not deny their admission - And acknowledgment of indebtedness (H6) Ifeanyichukwu Trad. Invest. Ven. Ltd. v. Onyesom Comm. Bank (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2183; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1487) 1

 

LEGAL PRACTITIONERS - Mistake - Court does not punish litigant because of error committed by his counsel - Save it can be shown that the litigant was party to the commission of the error (H12) S.P.D.C. Nig. Ltd. v. Agbara (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3707; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1496) 353

 

LEGAL PRACTITIONERS - Mistake of - Appeals - Dismissal of appellant’s appeal based on the inadvertence of his counsel - Is a denial of right to be heard on the merit (H2) Abah v. Monday (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1569; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1480) 569

 

LEGAL PRACTITIONERS - Signature - Abbreviated name - Processes signed in such name by qualified legal practitioner are not invalid - As nothing in LPA s. 2(1) prohibits the use of initials (H3) Dankwambo v. Abubakar (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3237; (2016) 2 NWLR (Pt.1495) 157

 

LEGAL PRACTITIONERS - Stamp & seal - Rules of Professional Conduct 2007 r. 10(1) - Effect of not fixing the approved seal & stamp - Is that document is deemed not to have been properly signed - But not incompetent (H3) Yaki v. Bagudu (2015) 11 KLR (pt. 374) 3503; (2015) 18 NWLR (Pt.1491) 288

 

LEGISLATIONS - Administrative law - Governor - Powers of - Powers conferred on Governor by Commission of Inquiry Law s. 2(1) is wide - Hence to apply ejusdem generis rule to the section - Is to restrict the Governor’s powers (H2) Kabirikim v. Emefor (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2907; (2009) 14 NWLR (Pt.1162) 602

 

LEGISLATIONS- Amendment - Applicable law - Where cause of action accrued prior to alteration of law governing same - Applicable law is the one in force at the time the cause of action accrued (H2) SPDC Nig. Ltd. v. Anaro (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2281; (2015) 12 NWLR (Pt.1472) 122

 

LEGISLATIONS - Constitution - Supremacy of - It is the norm validating norm - Being the yardstick by which the validity of legislations made thereunder can be tested and determined (H4) ACN v. INEC (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3031; (2013) 13 NWLR (Pt.1370) 161

 

LEGISLATIONS - Courts - Interpretation - Justice - Court does not read provisions of enactment in a way to deny litigant access to justice - As court is guided by its rule in conduct of its business (H10) S.P.D.C. Nig. Ltd. v. Agbara (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3707; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1496) 353

 

LEGISLATURE - Federal High Court - Jurisdiction - Extent of - Exclusive jurisdiction of the court is tied to the listed items - And to others as may be conferred upon it by Act of the National Assembly (H3) Wema Securities & Finance Plc. v. Nig. Agric. Insu. Corp. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2557; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 93

 

LEGISLATURE - Politics - Political party - Member - Defection of - Save for a division practically affecting the functioning of a party - Its member in legislative house defecting to another party - Automatically loses his seat (H2) Abegunde v. Ondo State H.A. (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1111; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1461) 314

 

LEGISLATURE - Statutes - Interpretation - Literary rule - Courts must interpret the law within the context of its constitutive words - And refrain from seeking the meaning outside the clear words used by legislators (H6) Nobis-Elendu v. INEC (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 1981; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1485) 197

 

LEGISLATURE - Statutes - Interpretation - Principle - Provisions of statute is not construed in a way as to defeat intention of legislature - Or to defeat the ends it was meant to serve (H5) Nyesom v. Peterside (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3361; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1492) 71

 

LOCUS STANDI - Appeals - Res judicata - Appellant is stopped per rem judicatam - From bringing same case before the court - As he cannot question conduct of election - In which he did not participate (H5) Sylva v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1067; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1486) 576

 

LOCUS STANDI - Courts - Judicial power - Entitlement to - For a person to be entitled to invoke judicial power - He must show that his personal interest will be or has been adversely affected (H1) Yar’adua v. CPC (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2989

 

LOCUS STANDI - Elections - Action - Locus standi - Only a participant in primaries can complain of the outcome - But as appellant did not participate in the rerun primaries - He has no locus standi to institute the suit (H5) Daniel v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 809; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1463) 113

 

LOCUS STANDI - Fundamentality of - It is the legal capacity to institute proceedings in court - And if plaintiff does not have locus standi - Court would have no jurisdiction to entertain the suit (H4) Daniel v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 809; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1463) 113

 

LOCUS STANDI - Jurisdiction - Privity of - Respondents had no ground to sue appellant under the lease agreement - As absence of locus standi deprived trial court of jurisdiction to entertain the matter (H2) Rebold Ind. Ltd. v. Magreola (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1349; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1461) 210

 

LOCUS STANDI - Land law - Trespass - Having established interest in the matter - Respondent has locus to defend a case of trespass into his family land (H1) Jitte v. Okpulor (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3649; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1497) 542

 

LOCUS STANDI - Proof - Plaintiff is said to have shown sufficient interest - Once he has right or vested interest to protect and enforce - Which has been disclosed in the writ and statement of claim (H1) INEC v. Ogbadibo L. G. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2399; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1498) 167

 

MARITIME LAW - Fishery - Right of - Adeshina v. Lemonu - Fishing in tidal waters is a public right - Both under common law and natural law - And was not affected by Minerals Act s. 3(1) (H3) SPDC Nig. Ltd. v. Anaro (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2281; (2015) 12 NWLR (Pt.1472) 122

 

MARITIME LAW - Fishing - Right of - Is limited to the portion within the borders of the communities - Hence miscarriage of justice was not occasioned by trial court’s interpretation of respondents’ claim (H1) Sakati v. Bako (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2085; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1480) 531

 

MARITIME LAW - Fishing - Right of - Regulations - Legal Notice Regulation 4(5) was not meant to take away the right - But to regulate exercise of same (H2) Sakati v. Bako (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2085; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1480) 531

 

MARITIME LAW - Issue - Res judicata - Conditions for application of the doctrine are not available - Since neither the parties nor subject matter of the proceedings in England - Are the same in this appeal (H3) Oleksandr v. Lonestar Drilling Co. Ltd. (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1301; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1464) 337

 

MARITIME LAW - Judgment - Appeal - As there was no appeal against the finding of trial court - Issue as to who was responsible for appellants’ detention aboard the ship is settled (H1) Oleksandr v. Lonestar Drilling Co. Ltd. (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1301; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1464) 337

 

MARITIME LAW - Judgment ­- Validity - Conclusion reached by the lower court was based on proper appraisal of evidence - Hence there is no cogent reason to warrant interference (H2) Oleksandr v. Lonestar Drilling Co. Ltd. (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1301; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1464) 337

 

MARITIME LAW - Oil spillage - Damages - Proof - Damages awarded are not baseless - As evidence showed that some fishes died as a result of the spillage (H5) SPDC Nig. Ltd. v. Anaro (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2281; (2015) 12 NWLR (Pt.1472) 122

 

MARITIME LAW - Oil spillage - Negligence - Rylands v. Fletcher - In respect of damages resulting from escape of oil waste - CA’s affirmation of trial court on res ipsa loquitur - And the rule in the case law cannot be faulted (H4) SPDC Nig. Ltd. v. Anaro (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2281; (2015) 12 NWLR (Pt.1472) 122

 

MASTER & SERVANT - Contract of service - Proof - Aggrieved employee following termination from service - Must plead and prove his contract of service - To substantiate his claim (H1) Aji v. Chad Basin Dev. Auth. (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 937; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1486) 554

 

MOTIONS - Courts - Applications - Joint hearing - The procedure adopted by trial judge in hearing all applications jointly - Amounts to procedural expediency - Clearly within His Lordship’s powers (H6) Assams v. Ararume (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3629; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1493) 368

 

MOTIONS - Courts - Discretion - Exercise of - Conditions - Where applicant prays for exercise of discretion - He must place before court sufficient materials - To be relied upon in granting his application (H2) Adigwe v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1381; (2015) 18 NWLR (Pt.1490) 105

 

MOTIONS - Courts - Supervision of - Application - For superior court to prevent tribunal from exceeding its jurisdiction - Applicant must present facts necessary to justify grant of the order sought (H4) Onyekwuluje v. Benue State Govt. (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2043; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 40

 

MOTIONS - Fair hearing - Consideration of - All applications properly brought before court must be heard - As any breach will nullify the proceedings (H2) Odedo v. PDP (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2007

 

MOTIONS - Jurisdiction - Objection - Determination of - Basis - Where the objection is raised by motion supported by affidavit - The affidavit evidence and facts deposed to in opposition must be considered (H2) Roda v. FRN (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 121; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1468) 427

 

MOTIONS - Supreme Court - Powers - Hearing of motions - SC Act s. 22 - As there are conditions for exercise of its powers - The court can invoke the section to determine the merit of the application (H4) Odedo v. PDP (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2007

 

MURDER - Actus reus - Proof - Credible evidence adduced by PW1 - Who was the only direct eye witness to the incident - Is sufficient proof that act of appellant caused the death (H2) Ali v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1611; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 1

 

MURDER - Appeals - Fresh issue - Validity of - Although the issue of absence of appellant is fresh in SC - The court allowed same because of the criminal trial which attracted highest sentence (H3) Mohammad v. State (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 101

 

MURDER - Confession - Veracity of - From appellant’s positive account - Lower courts rightly resolved fact of the death of deceased - And that it was appellant’s gruesome act that caused it (H2) Iliyasu v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 559; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1469) 26

 

MURDER - Conviction - Circumstantial evidence - Accused can be convicted of murder - Where there is cogent and compelling circumstantial evidence - To the fact that he killed the victim (H1) Jua v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2873; (2010) 4 NWLR (Pt.1184) 217

 

MURDER - Conviction - Circumstantial evidence - Where there is no direct evidence - Court can draw inference from proved facts - Going by circumstances surrounding the cause of death (H8) Alo v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 331; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1464) 238

 

MURDER - Conviction - Corpus delicti - Absence of - Corpus delicti is not produced in all cases to secure conviction - As accused can be convicted where there is evidence linking him with killing of deceased (H5) Jua v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2873; (2010) 4 NWLR (Pt.1184) 217

 

MURDER - Death - Proof - From evidence of PW2 which corroborated that of PW1 - And the medical report presented by PW4 - There is no contradiction that the deceased is dead (H1) Ali v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1611; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 1

 

MURDER - Evidence - Contradiction - Contrary to contention of appellant - No material contradiction exists in evidence adduced by prosecution - To proof the murder case (H5) Maiyaki v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2735; (2008) 15 NWLR (Pt.1109) 173

 

MURDER - Evidence - Credibility of - Tainted witness - PW1 was not tainted witness but a witness of truth - Whose evidence was properly evaluated by trial court and affirmed by CA (H10) Ali v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1611; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 1

 

MURDER - Evidence - Witnesses related to deceased - Nkebisi v. State - Such relationship does not disqualify them as prosecution witnesses - As what is vital is their credibility (H9) Ali v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1611; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 1

 

MURDER - Ingredients - Proof - For prosecution to secure a conviction - He must prove that deceased died - That the death was due to act of appellant - And that the act was intentional (H1) Maiyaki v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2735; (2008) 15 NWLR (Pt.1109) 173

 

MURDER - Ingredients - Proof - For prosecution to secure conviction - He must prove death of deceased - That the act of accused caused the death - And that the act was intentional (H4) Mbang v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3113; (2013) 7 NWLR (Pt.1352) 48

 

MURDER - Ingredients - Proof - Prosecution has burden to prove that accused killed the deceased - That the killing was unlawful - And that it was intentional (H1) Abirifon v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3021; (2013) 13 NWLR (Pt.1372) 587

 

MURDER - Ingredients - Proof - Prosecution must prove that deceased died - And that his death was caused by accused - Who intended to kill or cause grievous bodily harm to deceased (H1) Iliyasu v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 559; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1469) 26

 

MURDER - Ingredients - Proof - Prosecution must prove that the deceased died - That the death was unlawful - That act of accused caused the death - And that accused intended to cause death (H9) Alo v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 331; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1464) 238

 

MURDER - Ingredients - Proof - Prosecution must prove that the victim died - That the death resulted from act of accused - With intention that death or grievous bodily harm was probable effect (H1) Alao v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1411; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1488) 245

 

MURDER - Intention - Dangerous weapon - Where such weapon was used - Court will infer that death was a probable - And not just a likely consequence of accused act (H3) Iliyasu v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 559; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1469) 26

 

MURDER - Judgment - Absence of accused - In the absence of allocutus before death sentence on appellant - Presumption is that he was not present in court - Which omission vitiated the trial (H2) Mohammad v. State (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 101

 

MURDER - Mens rea - Proof - The use of axe on very sensitive part of the body - Is a confirmation that appellant intended death as the natural consequence of his act (H3) Ali v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1611; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 1

 

MURDER - Proof - Autopsy - Identity of deceased - Where prosecution identifies body of deceased via autopsy - Separate witness on issue of deceased’s identity is not vital (H2) Princewill v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2801; (1994) 6 NWLR (Pt.353) 703

 

MURDER - Proof - Cause of death - Instrument used - It is enough that deceased was struck with a heavy weapon at the head - Hence it did not matter whether the instrument was an axe or machete (H11) Ali v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1611; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 1

 

MURDER - Proof - Conviction - Absence of autopsy - Where evidence abound that deceased had died - But autopsy was not conducted - Accused may be convicted on circumstantial evidence (H3) Princewill v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2801; (1994) 6 NWLR (Pt.353) 703

 

MURDER - Proof - Dangerous object - Where one stabs with a sharp object on vulnerable part of the body - He is deemed to have intended to cause bodily injury - Knowing that death could result (H2) Alao v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1411; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1488) 245

 

MURDER - Proof - Date of death - Contained in the charge cannot be presumed - As it is an ingredient of the charge to be proved beyond reasonable doubt (H3) Zubairu v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1919; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1486) 504

 

MURDER - Proof - Doctrine of last seen - In absence of explanation as to cause of death - A person last seen with deceased bears full responsibility for his death (H6) Iliyasu v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 559; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1469) 26

 

MURDER - Proof - Evidence - Evidence reveal that appellant certainly knew so much about the death of deceased - And to these facts he did confess in his statement (H6) Alo v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 331; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1464) 238

 

MURDER - Proof - Exception - No matter the reckless conduct of accused - So long as the killing that resulted from his act was not intended - The act would not constitute murder (H2) Oketaolegun v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2531; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1477) 538

 

MURDER - Proof - From graphic accounts of exhibits F4 & F5 - None other than appellant as a party in criminis - Could possibly have killed the deceased (H8) Mbang v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3113; (2013) 7 NWLR (Pt.1352) 48

 

MURDER - Proof - Identity of deceased - Where evidence of autopsy is called - Failure to identify body of deceased is fatal - Save there is cogent evidence identifying deceased as killed by appellant (H1) Princewill v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2801; (1994) 6 NWLR (Pt.353) 703

 

MURDER - Proof - Ingredients - Prosecution must prove that the deceased had died - That act of the accused caused the death - And that the act was done with intention to cause death (H1) Akinlolu v. State (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3601; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1497) 503

 

MURDER - Proof - Means of - Murder can be proved by confession of accused - Direct evidence - Or by circumstantial evidence (H2) Abirifon v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3021; (2013) 13 NWLR (Pt.1372) 587

 

MURDER - Proof - Medical report - Is needed in this circumstance to identify body of the deceased - As the death did not occur instantly after injury was inflicted (H4) Zubairu v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1919; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1486) 504

 

MURDER - Proof - Standard of - To secure conviction for murder - Prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt - That the death of deceased was caused directly or indirectly by act of accused (H5) Princewill v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2801; (1994) 6 NWLR (Pt.353) 703

 

MURDER - Provocation - The defence would not avail appellant - As his reaction was disproportionate - Hence it is immaterial that he did not intend to hurt the deceased (H1) Owhoruke v. COP (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2235; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1483) 557

 

MURDER - Self defence - The defence would not avail appellant - Since at the time he stabbed the deceased - He was not in apprehension of death (H2) Owhoruke v. COP (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2235; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1483) 557

 

NEGLIGENCE - Maritime law - Oil spillage - Rylands v. Fletcher - In respect of damages resulting from escape of oil waste - CA’s affirmation of trial court on res ipsa loquitur - And the rule in the case law cannot be faulted (H4) SPDC Nig. Ltd. v. Anaro (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2281; (2015) 12 NWLR (Pt.1472) 122

 

NO CASE SUBMISSION - Proof - Prima facie case - Is found to have been established where prosecution - Has proved the essential elements of the offence - And its evidence has not been discredited (H1) Uzoagba v. COP (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3143

 

NO CASE SUBMISSION - Trial - Prima facie case - CPC ss. 158 & 159 - As prima facie case is found established against appellants - The case is remitted to the trial Magistrate Court for conclusion (H2) Uzoagba v. COP (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3143

 

OBITER DICTUM - Appeals - Ground - Issue - Formulation - Obiter dictum - The comment by CA is obiter dictum - Which cannot be the basis for raising ground of appeal - From which an issue can be framed (H3) APC v. PDP (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1179; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1481) 1

 

OBJECTIONS - Appeals - Document - Admissibility of - Where document is unlawfully admitted without objection at trial - Appellant can still object on appeal - Particularly where miscarriage of justice occurred (H5) Unity Life & Fire Insurance Ltd. v. Int’l Bank of W. Africa (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2821; (2001) 7 NWLR (Pt.713) 610

 

OBJECTIONS - Appeals - Preliminary objection - Basis - Under SC Rules 1999 preliminary objection is not restricted to grounds of law or facts - And even if affidavit is struck out - Grounds for the objection is intact (H2) PPA v. INEC (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2941; (2012) 13 NWLR (Pt.1317) 215

 

OBJECTIONS - Appeals - Preliminary objection - Incorporated in brief - CA Rules O. 3 r. 15 - Notice of the objection raised in brief - To which appellant has reacted - Is sufficient compliance with the rule (H1) Wema Securities & Finance Plc. v. Nig. Agric. Insu. Corp. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2557; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 93

 

OBJECTIONS - Appeals - Preliminary objection - Purpose - Issue in the objection must be first resolved - As its resolution obviates the need for the dissipation of time - In determination of appeal on the merit (H3) Ikuepenikan v. State (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1273; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1465) 518

 

OBJECTIONS - Armed robbery - Medical report - Admissibility - The report having been admitted without objection - And without asking for the presence of the maker - It is late to complain of his absence (H5) Kolawole v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 411; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1460) 134

 

OBJECTIONS - Banking - Statement of account - Admissibility of - Failure to object - As no objection was raised - Appellant is deemed to have consented - Although conditions precedent for its admissibility were not established (H3) Unity Life & Fire Insurance Ltd. v. Int’l Bank of W. Africa (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2821; (2001) 7 NWLR (Pt.713) 610

 

OBJECTIONS - Charges - Arraignment - Validity of - Once accused pleads to a charge without objection - It is presumed that he understands the charge preferred against him (H1) Olaolu v. Federal Republic of Nigeria (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1797

 

OBJECTIONS - Charges - Plea - Objection - Where accused pleads to charge before the court without objection - It is presupposed that he understood the charge preferred against him (H3) Daniel v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1757; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 119

 

OBJECTIONS - Charges - Time of objection - Objection to a charge for any formal defect - Shall be taken immediately after the charge had been read over to accused - Before he takes his plea (H3) Ibrahim v. State (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 995; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1469) 164

 

OBJECTIONS - Confession - Time - Proper time to raise objection to voluntariness of confession - Is at the point when it is to be tendered in evidence (H4) Alo v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 331; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1464) 238

 

OBJECTIONS - Court martial - Composition of - Objection - Failure to object to membership of an unqualified officer of the court - Does not bar the party to raise same objection bordering on jurisdiction on appeal (H2) Zakari v. Nigerian Army (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1533; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1487) 77

 

OBJECTIONS - Courts - Evidence - Admissibility of - Objection - Where inadmissible evidence is tendered - And party or counsel on other side fails to object - Court in civil cases may and in criminal cases must reject such evidence (H7) Unity Life & Fire Insurance Ltd. v. Int’l Bank of W. Africa (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2821; (2001) 7 NWLR (Pt.713) 610

 

OBJECTIONS - Documents - Admissibility - Objection - Appellant is to raise issue of non compliance with E.A. s. 57 - When the document was sought to be tendered - But having failed to object - No miscarriage of justice was suffered (H8) Blessing v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1653; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 1

 

OBJECTIONS - Jurisdiction - Determination - Basis - In suits fought on pleadings - Objection is resolved by examining plaintiff’s claim - And in originating motion - Affidavit in support is considered (H1) Akpamgbo-Okadigbo v. Chidi (2) (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 759; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 124

 

OBJECTIONS - Jurisdiction - Determination of - Basis - Where the objection is raised by motion supported by affidavit - The affidavit evidence and facts deposed to in opposition must be considered (H2) Roda v. FRN (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 121; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1468) 427

 

OBJECTIONS - Preliminary objection - Filing - Conditions - SC Rules O. 2 r. 9(1) - Relying on the mandatory provisions of r. 9(1) will amount to technicality and breed injustice (H1) Odedo v. PDP (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2007

 

OBJECTIONS - University - Confession - Objection - 3rd accused being a University graduate - Ought to know the import of the claim that a statement was made involuntarily (H1) FRN v. Borishade (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 81; (2015) 5 NWLR (Pt.1451) 155

 

ORDERS OF COURT - Actions - Striking out - Effect - Once a matter is struck out by a court - The court lacks jurisdiction to make any subsequent order on it (H13) S.P.D.C. Nig. Ltd. v. Agbara (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3707; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1496) 353

 

ORDERS OF COURT - Appeals - Court processes - Misuse of - Order to be made - Where originating summons was used in contentious matter - Appellate court is not to go into the merits - But should strike out the matter (H2) Adeyelu II v. Oyewunmi (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2689

 

ORDERS OF COURT - Documents - Amendment - Commencement - Amendment takes effect not from the date it is ordered by court - But from the date of the original document (H2) Akpamgbo-Okadigbo v. Chidi (1) (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 953; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 124

 

ORDERS OF COURT - Election - Nomination - Status quo - CA ought to have given an order - Which confines the parties to state of things as it was before litigation started (H2) Soludo v. Osigbo (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2983; (2009) 18 NWLR (Pt.1173) 290

 

ORDERS OF COURT - Elections - Preelection - SC order - Amendment of - The order made by this court in the earlier appeal is set aside - As SC is not one of the courts regulated by Electoral Act s. 141 (H3) Jev v. Iyortom (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 601; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1483) 484

 

ORDERS OF COURT - Jurisdiction - Absence of - Effect - Court either has jurisdiction to make certain orders or it does not - Where it lacks jurisdiction - Its pronouncement is of no legal effect (H4) Lafferi Nig. Ltd. v. Nal Merchant Bank Plc. (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1459; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1478) 64

 

ORDERS OF COURT - Justice - Need to uphold - Pursuant to Plateau State HC Rules O. 47 r. 1 - Order made by CA did not make new case for the parties - Rather it was made to do justice (H14) Kayih v. Yilbuk (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 625; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 26

 

ORDERS OF COURT - Land law - Lease - Forfeiture - Condition - Forfeiture on grounds of misconduct can only be ordered to determine a valid lease - And as there is no valid lease - The courts below wrongfully made the order (H5) Ogundalu v. Macjob (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1021; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1460) 96

 

ORIGINATING SUMMONS - Appeals - Court processes - Misuse of - Order to be made - Where originating summons was used in contentious matter - Appellate court is not to go into the merits - But should strike out the matter (H2) Adeyelu II v. Oyewunmi (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2689

 

ORIGINATING SUMMONS - Jurisdiction - Determination - Basis - It is plaintiff’s claim that would be considered - And where suit is commenced by originating summons - Averments in affidavit are considered (H2) James v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 863; (2015) 12 NWLR (Pt.1474) 538

 

ORIGINATING SUMMONS - Propriety - It is used where special statutory provisions exist for its application - And not for proceedings where facts are in dispute (H1) Adeyelu II v. Oyewunmi (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2689

 

PARTIES - Actions - Limitation - Public Officers Protection Act - Application - For s. 2 of the Act to avail a party - It must be shown that defendant is public officer - Who acted in pursuance of public duty (H3) Ibrahim v. Lawal (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 1949; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 490

 

PARTIES - Actions - Lis pendens - Doctrine of - It prevents the transfer of right or taking of steps - Capable of foisting a state of helplessness on parties or court - During the pendency of an action in court (H2) Wambai v. Donatus (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3163; (2014) 14 NWLR (Pt.1427) 223

 

PARTIES - Appeals - As of right - Or with leave - Distinction - 1999 Constitution s. 243(1)(a) - A party can exercise right of appeal - While person having an interest can only exercise his right of appeal with leave (H2) Assams v. Ararume (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3629; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1493) 368

 

PARTIES - Appeals - Evidence - Evaluation - Issue as to whether party proved his claim - Cannot be determined without evaluating evidence - Hence CA rightly proceeded to evaluate the evidence and considered exhibits tendered (H6) Kabirikim v. Emefor (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2907; (2009) 14 NWLR (Pt.1162) 602

 

PARTIES - Appeals - Finding - Failure to appeal - As there is no further appeal to SC against the order made by CA - Dismissing appellant’s cross appeal - The finding is binding on all the parties (H7) Kayih v. Yilbuk (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 625; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 26

 

PARTIES - Appeals - Fresh issue - Party raising an issue for the first time must do so by leave of court - Save where the issue is on jurisdiction - Which is the foundation of adjudication (H4) Sakati v. Bako (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2085; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1480) 531

 

PARTIES - Appeals - Interested parties - Petition against 3rd-36th respondents having been dismissed - Any appeal against the decision gives them sufficient interest (H4) Ihedioha v. Okorocha (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3287; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1492) 147

 

PARTIES - Appeals - Interested party - Leave - Failure to obtain - Appellants being interested parties ought to seek leave to appeal - And having failed to do so - CA rightly struck out the appeal as incompetent (H4) Assams v. Ararume (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3629; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1493) 368

 

PARTIES - Appeals - Issue - Suo motu raising - By virtue of CA Act s. 15 - The court has jurisdiction to suo motu raise any issue - And determine same after hearing parties (H1) Nobis-Elendu v. INEC (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 1981; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1485) 197

 

PARTIES - Appeals - Issues - Raising of - Where court advances reasons for not dealing with an issue - An aggrieved person can raise any or all the reasons given by the court - As an issue on appeal (H5) Sakati v. Bako (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2085; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1480) 531

 

PARTIES - Appeals - Joinder of party - Appellant’s application for joinder lacks merit and is abuse of court process - As he has no business in the appeal (H5) Odedo v. PDP (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2007

 

PARTIES - Appeals - Jurisdiction - Fresh issue of - Although a party must seek leave to raise fresh issue - But where issue is on jurisdiction - The same can be raised for the first time on appeal without leave (H2) Wema Securities & Finance Plc. v. Nig. Agric. Insu. Corp. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2557; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 93

 

PARTIES - Appeals - Leave - Application - Time frame - No period of time is prescribed within which interested party may apply for leave - But when leave is obtained - Appeal must be within time prescribed by CA Act s. 25 (H3) Assams v. Ararume (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3629; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1493) 368

 

PARTIES - Appeals - Notice of - Filing - Proper venue - Party aggrieved by decision of any HC - Shall file his notice in registry of the trial court not that of CA - Save after compilation and transmission of record (H4) S.P.D.C. Nig. Ltd. v. Agbara (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3707; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1496) 353

 

PARTIES - Appeals - Res judicata - Application - Parties and subject matter in present appeal being different from the previous appeal - CA was wrong to apply the principle of res judicata (H2) Ogbolosingha v. Bayelsa S.I.E.C. (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 461; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1455) 311

 

PARTIES - Contracts - Arbitration clause - Is a procedural provision whereby parties agree - That only disputes should be submitted to arbitration - And it does not limit rights or remedies of parties (H2) Onyekwuluje v. Benue State Govt. (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2043; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 40

 

PARTIES - Contracts - Breach - Damages - Court is concerned with damages which are natural and probable consequences of the breach - Or damages within the contemplation of parties (H1) Agu v. General Oil Ltd. (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1155; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1488) 327

 

PARTIES - Contracts - Privity of - Only parties to a contract can enforce it - Third party to a contract cannot do so - Even if the contract was made for his benefit (H1) Rebold Ind. Ltd. v. Magreola (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1349; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1461) 210

 

PARTIES - Court martial - Composition of - Objection - Failure to object to membership of an unqualified officer of the court - Does not bar the party to raise same objection bordering on jurisdiction on appeal (H2) Zakari v. Nigerian Army (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1533; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1487) 77

 

PARTIES - Court processes - Abuse - Features - It manifests in improper use of judicial process by party - To interfere with due administration of justice (H5) Lokpobiri v. Ogola (2015) 11 KLR (pt. 374) 3461; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 328

 

PARTIES - Court processes - Service - Jurisdiction - Where service is needed - Failure to effect same renders the proceedings void - As no court has jurisdiction where any of the parties was not served (H3) Compagnie Generale De Geopysique Nig. Ltd. v. Aminu (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 793; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1459) 577

 

PARTIES - Courts - Admissibility of - Objection - Where inadmissible evidence is tendered - And party or counsel on other side fails to object - Court in civil cases may and in criminal cases must reject such evidence (H7) Unity Life & Fire Insurance Ltd. v. Int’l Bank of W. Africa (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2821; (2001) 7 NWLR (Pt.713) 610

 

PARTIES - Courts - Customary courts - To ascertain capacity in which a party initiates action in the court - The whole proceedings must be looked into - And broad interpretation placed on the judgment (H2) Jitte v. Okpulor (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3649; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1497) 542

 

PARTIES - Courts - Discretion - Exercise of - Condition - Person seeking indulgence of court must place before it - Sufficient materials in order to assist court exercise its discretion in his favour (H2) Yar’adua v. CPC (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2989

 

PARTIES - Courts - Federal High Court - Jurisdiction - In considering issue of its jurisdiction - Status of the parties and subject matter of the claim must be looked at (H5) Wema Securities & Finance Plc. v. Nig. Agric. Insu. Corp. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2557; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 93

 

PARTIES - Courts - Issue - Suo motu raising - Court is not entitled to raise an issue suo motu - And decide on it without affording parties opportunity to be heard (H1) Ominiyi v. Alabi (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 711; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1456) 572

 

PARTIES - Courts - Issues - Suo motu raising - Court can raise issue suo motu in the interest of justice - But it must invite parties to address it on such issue - Before basing its decision thereupon (H3) Odedo v. PDP (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2007

 

PARTIES - Courts - Issues - Suo motu raising - Court should not raise a point suo motu - And proceed to resolve same without hearing the parties - Especially party that will be adversely affected by the issue (H2) Olaolu v. Federal Republic of Nigeria (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1797

 

PARTIES - Courts - Joinder of parties - Is ordered where the party is aggrieved - To avoid multiplicity of suits - Completely deal with the suit - Ensure fair hearing and to avoid loss of jurisdiction (H4) Akpamgbo-Okadigbo v. Chidi (1) (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 953; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 124

 

PARTIES - Courts - Land law - Pleadings ­- Binding nature of - A Judge should not give evidence on identity of land - As court should not set up for parties - A case different from the one in their pleadings (H5) Addah v. Ubandawaki (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 183; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1458) 325

 

PARTIES - Courts - Procedure - Irregularity in - Waiver - Where party at trial consented to a procedure which is merely wrong - It is late to complain against same on appeal - Simply because he lost the case (H6) Unity Life & Fire Insurance Ltd. v. Int’l Bank of W. Africa (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2821; (2001) 7 NWLR (Pt.713) 610

 

PARTIES - Courts - Unchallenged evidence - Weight of - Where evidence given by party was not challenged by the opposite party - Court can act on such unchallenged evidence before it (H9) Unity Life & Fire Insurance Ltd. v. Int’l Bank of W. Africa (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2821; (2001) 7 NWLR (Pt.713) 610

 

PARTIES - Description of - Mistake - Where description of party on a process is a mere misnomer - An amendment would suffice to put it right - Provided that the person misnamed is a juristic entity (H1) Omisore v. Aregbesola (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1821; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1482) 205

 

PARTIES - Documents - Public document - Admissibility - Only duly certified copies of the documents are admissible - Where the parties do not intend to produce their originals (H10) Omisore v. Aregbesola (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1821; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1482) 205

 

PARTIES - Election petitions - Necessary party - 4th & 5th respondents not being INEC officials - Are not necessary or even parties to the petition - Challenging the gubernatorial election (H1) APC v. PDP (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1179; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1481) 1

 

PARTIES - Elections - Fair hearing - Breach - Reliefs granted to 1st to 17th respondents in absence of appellants - Is in breach of right to fair hearing of the latter - Hence the proceedings being perverse is set aside (H3) Akpamgbo-Okadigbo v. Chidi (1) (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 953; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 124

 

PARTIES - Evidence - Production - Crime - Methods exist to compel production of material evidence - It is only when such are employed and opponent fails to comply - That withholding of evidence arises (H6) Busari v. State (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 53; (2015) 5 NWLR (Pt.1452) 343

 

PARTIES - Fair Hearing - Breach - Allegation of - A party must be heard before case against him is determined - And once he can satisfy court that his right to fair hearing was infringed - He is entitled to remedy (H5) Assams v. Ararume (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3629; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1493) 368

 

PARTIES - Fair hearing - Breach - Effect - Decision of CA arising from the issue raised suo motu - And without hearing the parties is a nullity - For being a breach of constitutional right to fair hearing (H2) Ominiyi v. Alabi (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 711; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1456) 572

 

PARTIES - Fraud - Company - Lifting the veil - Court will not allow a party to use its company as cover to defraud an innocent person - Who entered into lawful contract with it (H2) Oyebanji v. State (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2255; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1479) 270

 

PARTIES - Fraud - Misappropriation of funds - Proof - Relationship between the parties is not merely contractual - As appellant’s unlawful appropriation of money paid to him - Involves a criminal act (H3) Oyebanji v. State (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2255; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1479) 270

 

PARTIES - Joinder of - Application for - Delay - Applicants seeking to be joined in the suit between the two sets of respondents - Ought to have promptly joined the action at trial court (H3) Yar’adua v. CPC (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2989

 

PARTIES - Judgments - Appeals - Issue - Bordering on defect in the notice of appeal was settled to finality - And the only option open to a dissatisfied party - Is to appeal against it (H2) Michael v. Bank of the North (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1711; (2015) 12 NWLR (Pt.1473) 370

 

PARTIES - Judgments - Executory judgment - Meaning - Is one that states the respective rights of parties - And also orders defendant to act in a particular way - Or refrain from interfering with plaintiff’s rights (H2) Iragbiji v. Oyewole (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3099; (2013) 13 NWLR (Pt.1372) 566

 

PARTIES - Jurisdiction - Issue of - Being a threshold matter - Jurisdiction can be raised at any stage of the proceedings - By any party to a dispute or even by court suo motu (H4) Ibrahim v. Lawal (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 1949; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 490

 

PARTIES - Jurisdiction - Sources of - Jurisdiction is a matter of law and is statutorily conferred - And neither the court nor parties can confer jurisdiction (H7) Odom v. PDP (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 677; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1456) 527

 

PARTIES - Jurisdiction - Sources of - No court can assume jurisdiction except it is statutorily endowed - As jurisdiction cannot be implied nor can it be conferred by agreement of parties (H5) Ibrahim v. Lawal (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 1949; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 490

 

PARTIES - Legal practitioners - Brief - Conduct of - When counsel is briefed by a party - He is empowered to do those things which the party is supposed to do - Except where the law demands otherwise (H3) Abah v. Monday (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1569; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1480) 569

 

PARTIES - Legal practitioners - Mistake - Court does not punish litigant because of error committed by his counsel - Save it can be shown that the litigant was party to the commission of the error (H12) S.P.D.C. Nig. Ltd. v. Agbara (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3707; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1496) 353

 

PARTIES - Maritime - Issue - Conditions for application of the doctrine are not available - Since neither the parties nor subject matter of the proceedings in England - Are the same in this appeal (H3) Oleksandr v. Lonestar Drilling Co. Ltd. (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1301; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1464) 337

 

PARTIES - Orders of court - Election - Nomination - Status quo - CA ought to have given an order - Which confines the parties to state of things as it was before litigation started (H2) Soludo v. Osigbo (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2983; (2009) 18 NWLR (Pt.1173) 290

 

PARTIES - Orders of court - Justice - Need to uphold - Pursuant to Plateau State HC Rules O. 47 r. 1 - Order made by CA did not make new case for the parties - Rather it was made to do justice (H14) Kayih v. Yilbuk (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 625; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 26

 

PARTIES - Pleadings - Binding nature of - Evidence led by a party which conflicts with his pleadings - Goes to no issue and should be discountenanced - As court and parties are bound by the pleadings (H5) Odom v. PDP (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 677; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1456) 527

 

PARTIES - Pleadings - Brevity of - Averred facts in pleadings relied on by parties - Should be concise and unambiguous - In order to avoid element of surprise in litigation (H4) Odom v. PDP (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 677; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1456) 527

 

PARTIES - Pleadings - Contradictions - Parties and courts are bound by pleadings - And any evidence at variance with pleadings must be disregarded by court (H6) Addah v. Ubandawaki (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 183; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1458) 325

 

PARTIES - Pleadings - Issue - Court proceeds on trial on issues in pleadings - But where party fails to call evidence in support of his issues - Court may resolve such issues against the defaulting party (H8) Unity Life & Fire Insurance Ltd. v. Int’l Bank of W. Africa (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2821; (2001) 7 NWLR (Pt.713) 610

 

PARTIES - Res judicata - Application - Conditions - For the plea to succeed - Parties must be the same in the two cases - Issues and subject matter must be the same - And judgment must be valid (H1) Omokhafe v. Esekhomo (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2783; (1993) 8 NWLR (Pt.309) 58

 

PARTIES - Res judicata - Plea - Condition - Party relying on the plea must establish inter alia that the parties and subject matter are the same - That the decision is valid and final - And that court has jurisdiction (H1) Ogbolosingha v. Bayelsa S.I.E.C. (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 461; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1455) 311

 

PLEADINGS - Jurisdiction - Determination of - Basis - Jurisdiction is determined by plaintiff’s claim - As endorsed in the writ of summons and statement of claim (H1) Sun Insu. Nig. Plc. v. Umez Eng. Const. Co Ltd. (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2319; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1471) 576

 

PLEADINGS - Actions - Limitation - Determination - Basis - Writ of summons and statement of claim are to be considered - To see when the wrong was committed (H2) Ibrahim v. Lawal (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 1949; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 490

 

PLEADINGS - Amendment - Lower courts rightly refused the amendment sought - As there was lack of good faith - With the result of overreaching respondent (H1) Compagnie Gen. De Geo. Nig. Ltd. v. Idorenyin (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1435; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 149

 

PLEADINGS - Appeals - Defence - Failure to raise - Appellant cannot rely on defence not pleaded at trial - Because respondent would have due to his failure - Lost opportunity of calling evidence to controvert (H10) Unity Life & Fire Insurance Ltd. v. Int’l Bank of W. Africa (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2821; (2001) 7 NWLR (Pt.713) 610

 

PLEADINGS - Appeals - Purpose of - It is to find out whether on the state of pleadings, evidence and applicable law - The lower court came to right decision - In relation to reliefs canvassed in the matter (H1) Odom v. PDP (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 677; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1456) 527

 

PLEADINGS - Averments - Not supported by evidence - Averments do not speak for the pleader without supporting evidence - Unless the adversary admits them (H6) Omisore v. Aregbesola (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1821; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1482) 205

 

PLEADINGS - Binding nature - In view of the state of the pleadings and evidence adduced - CA rightly held that allegation relating to murder was baseless - And that trial court’s finding was perverse (H9) Kayih v. Yilbuk (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 625; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 26

 

PLEADINGS - Binding nature of - Evidence led by a party which conflicts with his pleadings - Goes to no issue and should be discountenanced - As court and parties are bound by the pleadings (H5) Odom v. PDP (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 677; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1456) 527

 

PLEADINGS - Brevity of - Averred facts in pleadings relied on by parties - Should be concise and unambiguous - In order to avoid element of surprise in litigation (H4) Odom v. PDP (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 677; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1456) 527

 

PLEADINGS - Contract of service - Proof - Aggrieved employee following termination from service - Must plead and prove his contract of service - To substantiate his claim (H1) Aji v. Chad Basin Dev. Auth. (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 937; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1486) 554

 

PLEADINGS - Contracts - Breach - Damages - Pleadings - Award of general damages based on the unsubstantiated allegation - In addition to special damages awarded - Amounted to double compensation (H3) Agu v. General Oil Ltd. (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1155; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1488) 327

 

PLEADINGS - Courts - Land law - Pleadings - Binding nature of - A Judge should not give evidence on identity of land - As court should not set up for parties - A case different from the one in their pleadings (H5) Addah v. Ubandawaki (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 183; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1458) 325

 

PLEADINGS - Cross examination - Evidence - Admissibility - Evidence obtained in cross examination on matters that are pleaded - Is admissible (H8) Omisore v. Aregbesola (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1821; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1482) 205

 

PLEADINGS - Damages - Exemplary damages - Proof - Claim for such damages need not be pleaded expressly - It is enough if facts in the pleadings support award of the damages (H7) CBN v. Okojie (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2149; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1479) 231

 

PLEADINGS - Defence - Reply - Where defendant avers to a fact in statement of defence - And plaintiff fails to file a reply - Plaintiff may lead evidence to deny the averment in the statement of defence (H2) Ogundalu v. Macjob (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1021; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1460) 96

 

PLEADINGS - Evidence - Contradictions - Parties and courts are bound by pleadings - And any evidence at variance with pleadings must be disregarded by court (H6) Addah v. Ubandawaki (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 183; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1458) 325

 

PLEADINGS - Fundamental rights - Averments - Not supported by evidence - Absence of evidence to establish the legality of respondent’s arrest - Renders the arrest unlawful (H2) CBN v. Okojie (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2149; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1479) 231

 

PLEADINGS - Interests - Claim of - Where interest is claimed as a matter of right - Proper practice is to claim entitlement to it on the writ - And plead facts which show such entitlement in statement of claim (H10) Wema Securities & Finance Plc. v. Nig. Agric. Insu. Corp. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2557; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 93

 

PLEADINGS - Issues - Evidence - Court proceeds on trial on issues in pleadings - But where party fails to call evidence in support of his issues - Court may resolve such issues against the defaulting party (H8) Unity Life & Fire Insurance Ltd. v. Int’l Bank of W. Africa (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2821; (2001) 7 NWLR (Pt.713) 610

 

PLEADINGS - Jurisdiction - Determination - Basis - It is plaintiff’s claim that would be considered - And where suit is commenced by originating summons - Averments in affidavit are considered (H2) James v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 863; (2015) 12 NWLR (Pt.1474) 538

 

PLEADINGS - Jurisdiction - Objection - Determination - Basis - In suits fought on pleadings - Objection is resolved by examining plaintiff’s claim - And in originating motion - Affidavit in support is considered (H1) Akpamgbo-Okadigbo v. Chidi (2) (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 759; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 124

 

PLEADINGS - Land law - Title - Declaratory relief - Will not be conferred on appellants simply upon their pleadings - As there is no evidence tracing their history to their original ancestors (H3) Addah v. Ubandawaki (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 183; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1458) 325

 

PLEADINGS - Land law - Title - Root of - Proof - Where a person relies on traditional history as his root of title - He must plead same and lead evidence to establish it - Without any missing link (H2) Addah v. Ubandawaki (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 183; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1458) 325

 

PLEADINGS - Locus standi - Proof - Plaintiff is said to have shown sufficient interest - Once he has right or vested interest to protect and enforce - Which has been disclosed in the writ and statement of claim (H1) INEC v. Ogbadibo L. G. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2399; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1498) 167

 

PLEADINGS - Undefended suits - Defence on merit - Transfer to general list - Where there is such defence - Justice demands that the matter be transferred to general cause list - For hearing on the pleadings (H9) Wema Securities & Finance Plc. v. Nig. Agric. Insu. Corp. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2557; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 93

 

POLICE - Alibi - Defence - Conditions - For the defence to avail an accused - Such must be raised at the earliest opportunity - And with sufficient particulars to enable the police investigate it (H5) Mohammed v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 439

 

POLICE - Alibi - Defence - Conditions - For the defence to be entertained - It must be raised at earliest time - With sufficient particulars given of accused whereabouts - So as to enable police verify the claim (H10) Sale v. State (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3679; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 392

 

POLICE - Alibi - Defence - Failure to investigate - Failure of police to investigate the truth or otherwise of appellant’s alibi - Has cast doubt on prosecution’s case (H12) Sale v. State (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3679; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 392

 

POLICE - Alibi - Investigation - Failure of the police to investigate the defence - As properly raised by appellant - Created serious lapse in the conduct of prosecuting the case (H3) Sani v. State (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2115; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1483) 522

 

POLICE - Alibi - Investigation of - Alibi must be definite as to time and whereabouts of accused - And once timeously raised - It must be thoroughly investigated by the police (H2) Idemudia v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2369; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1488) 375

 

POLICE - Alibi - Plea - Validity - Appellant’s failure to raise the defence at earliest time nullifies same - As no burden shifted on the police to investigate (H3) Uche v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1731; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1470) 380

 

POLICE - Alibi - Proof - Accused is not obliged to prove his alibi - As it is enough if he supplies material facts - Sufficient for police to investigate the defence raised (H4) Idemudia v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2369; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1488) 375

 

POLICE - Armed robbery - Identification parade - Failure to conduct - Absence of conducting the parade - As well as failure to report the incident to Police timeously - Cast doubts on prosecution’s case (H3) Sale v. State (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3679; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1499) 392

 

POLICE - Confession - Retraction - Where accused during trial retracts from extrajudicial statement earlier made to police - It is his duty to impeach the earlier statement (H7) Okanlawon v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2431; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 445

 

POLICE - Evidence - Crime - Identification - Witness fixing accused at crime scene - Must mention name of accused at earliest opportunity time to police - Otherwise court will be cautious in accepting his evidence (H1) Idemudia v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2369; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1488) 375

 

POLICE - Evidence - Withholding of - It is presumed in this case - That evidence of police investigation and medical report - Were deliberately withheld by prosecution - Because if produced they would adversely affect its case (H2) Zubairu v. State (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1919; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1486) 504

 

POLICE - Fundamental rights - Enforcement - Right of action accrued to respondent to seek redress in FHC - Over malicious prosecution by appellants’ police officers (H1) CBN v. Okojie (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2149; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1479) 231

 

POLITICS - Election petitions - Validity - Res judicata - As judgment of trial Tribunal is valid and not set aside - Appellant cannot appeal on same subject matter without his political party (H2) Agbaje v. INEC (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3223; (2016) 4 NWLR (Pt.1501) 151

 

POLITICS - Elections - LG chairmen - Tenure - Duration of - Three years period provided in the LG Law s. 27(3)(a) is immutable - And no political party can elongate the prescribed tenure (H5) Ogbolosingha v. Bayelsa S.I.E.C. (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 461; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1455) 311

 

POLITICS - Elections - Political party - Importance of - Amaechi v. INEC - Political parties and not candidates are the most important in an election (H1) Agbaje v. INEC (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3223; (2016) 4 NWLR (Pt.1501) 151

 

POLITICS - Elections - Preelection - Where there is complaint about conduct of primaries - Court can by Electoral Act s. 87(9) - Examine if the election complied with the Act and constitution of the political party (H1) Akpamgbo-Okadigbo v. Chidi (1) (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 953; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 124

 

POLITICS - Elections - Primaries - Jurisdiction - Where dispute arises as to which of the primaries produced candidate for a political party - The matter is taken outside Electoral Act 2010 s. 87(4)(b)(ii), (c)(ii) & (9) (H2) Ugwu v. PDP (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 731; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1459) 478

 

POLITICS - Elections - Primaries - Relief - The injunctive relief sought against 2nd respondent cannot be made - As 1st respondent can no longer submit appellants’ name as the party’s candidate (H3) Ugwu v. PDP (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 731; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1459) 478

 

POLITICS - Elections - Primary election - Certificate of clearance - Import of the provisional certificate is that - Appellant could be excluded at the rerun primaries - As this is an internal affair of the political party (H1) Daniel v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 809; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1463) 113

 

POLITICS - Elections - Primary election - Where complaint is on non compliance with political party’s guidelines in the election - An aspirant may approach FHC or State HC for redress (H4) James v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 863; (2015) 12 NWLR (Pt.1474) 538

 

POLITICS - Political party - Member - Defection of - Save for a division practically affecting the functioning of a party - Its member in legislative house defecting to another party - Automatically loses his seat (H2) Abegunde v. Ondo State H.A. (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1111; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1461) 314

 

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE - Actions - Commencement - Limitation - Public Officers Protection Act - The plea can be raised by any of the respondents - And a successful defence under the Act ousts jurisdiction of court (H1) Sylva v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1067; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1486) 576

 

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE - Actions - Consolidation of - Purpose of - Consolidation is made for expediency and convenience - But where it will result to confusion - Consolidation will not be ordered (H2) Ngere v. Okuruket ‘XIV’ (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2215; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1482) 392

 

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE - Actions - Limitation - Public officers - Where actions are brought against them - The same must be filed within 3 months - After accrual of cause of action - Otherwise the right is unenforceable (H4) CBN v. Okojie (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2149; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1479) 231

 

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE - Actions - Limitation - Public Officers’ Protection Act - Where a law prescribes a period for instituting action - Proceedings cannot be instituted after that period (H1) Ibrahim v. Lawal (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 1949; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 490

 

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE - Adjournment - Application - Hearing & ruling - Every of such application whether in writing or orally - Must be heard on the merits - And decided upon before proceeding further with the case (H1) Abah v. Monday (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1569; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1480) 569

 

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE - Appeals - Dismissal - Want of diligent prosecution - Appeal dismissed on failure to file appellant’s brief is final - And the court has no jurisdiction to revive it (H1) Dakan v. Asalu (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1691; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 47

 

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE - Appeals - Fresh issue - Leave - Substantial issue not raised in lower court - Is not allowed to be raised for the first time in Supreme Court - Except with leave of the court (H6) Ibrahim v. Lawal (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 1949; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 490

 

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE - Appeals - Issue - Suo motu raising - By virtue of CA Act s. 15 - The court has jurisdiction to suo motu raise any issue - And determine same after hearing parties (H1) Nobis-Elendu v. INEC (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 1981; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1485) 197

 

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE - Appeals - Notice of - Filing - Proper venue - Party aggrieved by decision of any HC - Shall file his notice in registry of the trial court not that of CA - Save after compilation and transmission of record (H4) S.P.D.C. Nig. Ltd. v. Agbara (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3707; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1496) 353

 

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE - Appeals - Notice of appeal - Double filing - It is permissible to file two notices of appeal within time - And appellant who does so is not blameworthy on the side of caution (H1) FRN v. Dairo (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 211; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1454) 141

 

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE - Appeals - Party - Joinder of - Appellant’s application for joinder lacks merit and is abuse of court process - As he has no business in the appeal (H5) Odedo v. PDP (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2007

 

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE - Appeals - Record - Compilation - CA Rules 2007 - Appellant can compile record upon failure of registrar to do so - And respondent in such a situation is at liberty to compile additional records (H3) Michael v. Bank of the North (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1711; (2015) 12 NWLR (Pt.1473) 370

 

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE - Court processes - Service - Importance of - Service of originating process is precondition to exercise of jurisdiction - As where there is no service - Subsequent proceedings are nullity (H2) Ihedioha v. Okorocha (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3287; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1492) 147

 

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE - Courts - Document - Evaluation - A Judge is not permitted to embark on inquisitorial examination of documents outside court room - Or to act on what he discovered in same - Without evidence in support (H5) Omisore v. Aregbesola (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1821; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1482) 205

 

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE - Courts - Parties - Joinder of - Is ordered where the party is aggrieved - To avoid multiplicity of suits - Completely deal with the suit - Ensure fair hearing and to avoid loss of jurisdiction (H4) Akpamgbo-Okadigbo v. Chidi (1) (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 953; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 124

 

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE - Courts - State HC - Constitution 1999 s. 272(1) - The court has unlimited jurisdiction to hear and determine - Any civil proceeding in which the existence of legal right is in issue (H2) Kayih v. Yilbuk (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 625; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 26

 

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE - Elections - Breach - Reliefs granted to 1st to 17th respondents in absence of appellants - Is in breach of right to fair hearing of the latter - Hence the proceedings being perverse is set aside (H3) Akpamgbo-Okadigbo v. Chidi (1) (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 953; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 124

 

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE - Fair hearing - Breach - Allegation of - Appellants who participated fully in the proceedings of 3rd respondent - Cannot now complain of denial of fair hearing (H6) Onyekwuluje v. Benue State Govt. (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2043; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 40

 

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE - Fundamental rights - Public document - Attachment of -Though words used in O. 3 r. 1 of the Rules are discretionary - There is still need to attach the proceedings - To arrive at a fair decision (H1) Onyekwuluje v. Benue State Govt. (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2043; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 40

 

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE - Jurisdiction - Action ­- Striking out - Where court has no jurisdiction to determine a case - It has no jurisdiction to dismiss it - It should strike out the matter (H3) Sylva v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1067; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1486) 576

 

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE - Jurisdiction - Determination - Basis - It is plaintiff’s claim that would be considered - And where suit is commenced by originating summons - Averments in affidavit are considered (H2) James v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 863; (2015) 12 NWLR (Pt.1474) 538

 

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE - Jurisdiction - Fundamental nature of - Court should first determine issue of jurisdiction - Before embarking on any proceeding for hearing on the merit (H4) Sun Insu. Nig. Plc. v. Umez Eng. Const. Co Ltd. (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2319; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1471) 576

 

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE - Jurisdiction - Fundamentality of - It is so fundamental that the absence of same renders any proceeding conducted - As null and void and without any legal effect whatsoever (H1) Kayih v. Yilbuk (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 625; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 26

 

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE - Jurisdiction - Fundamentality of - Once issue of jurisdiction is raised - All proceedings abate until resolved - As proceedings conducted without jurisdiction amount to nullity (H4) Iragbiji v. Oyewole (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3099; (2013) 13 NWLR (Pt.1372) 566

 

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE - Jurisdiction - Issue of - Being a threshold matter - Jurisdiction can be raised at any stage of the proceedings - By any party to a dispute or even by court suo motu (H4) Ibrahim v. Lawal (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 1949; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 490

 

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE - Legal practitioners - Brief - Conduct of - When counsel is briefed by a party - He is empowered to do those things which the party is supposed to do - Except where the law demands otherwise (H3) Abah v. Monday (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1569; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1480) 569

 

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE - Oral evidence - Admissibility - If oral evidence given in witness box is unchallenged - It must be accepted as establishing the facts therein stated (H11) Kayih v. Yilbuk (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 625; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 26

 

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE - Parties - Description of - Mistake - Where description of party on a process is a mere misnomer - An amendment would suffice to put it right - Provided that the person misnamed is a juristic entity (H1) Omisore v. Aregbesola (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1821; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1482) 205

 

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE - Pleadings - Amendment - Lower courts rightly refused the amendment sought - As there was lack of good faith - With the result of overreaching respondent (H1) Compagnie Gen. De Geo. Nig. Ltd. v. Idorenyin (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1435; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 149

 

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE - Pleadings - Brevity of - Averred facts in pleadings relied on by parties - Should be concise and unambiguous - In order to avoid element of surprise in litigation (H4) Odom v. PDP (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 677; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1456) 527

 

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE - Pleadings - Defence - Reply - Where defendant avers to a fact in statement of defence - And plaintiff fails to file a reply - Plaintiff may lead evidence to deny the averment in the statement of defence (H2) Ogundalu v. Macjob (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1021; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1460) 96

 

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE - Rules - Non compliance - Effect - Every non compliance does not vitiate proceedings - But where court is robbed of jurisdiction - Processes and proceedings must be set aside (H3) Ihedioha v. Okorocha (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3287; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1492) 147

 

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE - Undefended suits - Defence on merit - Transfer to general list - Where there is such defence - Justice demands that the matter be transferred to general cause list - For hearing on the pleadings (H9) Wema Securities & Finance Plc. v. Nig. Agric. Insu. Corp. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2557; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 93

 

PROPERTY LAW - Leases - Validity - Approach made to renew the lease by original lessee and plaintiff was legally right - As no evidence existed that the lease had expired and remained unrenewed - Before it was assigned to plaintiff (H3) Briggs v. Chief Lands Officer Rivers State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2703; (2005) 12 NWLR (Pt.938) 59

 

PROPERTY LAW - Trespass - Injunction - Order of injunction granted is of a consequential nature - Made to protect plaintiff against 3rd defendant - Who is now a trespasser (H2) Briggs v. Chief Lands Officer Rivers State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2703; (2005) 12 NWLR (Pt.938) 59

 

RAPE - Ingredients - Proof - Prosecution must prove that accused had sex with prosecutrix - That it was done without her consent - That she was not wife of accused - And that there was penetration (H2) Adonike v. State (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 11; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1458) 237

 

RAPE - Proof - Corroboration - Evidence from PW3 and exhibit A support case of PW1 that she was violated by appellant - Hence the lower courts were right that both evidence confirm that of PW1 (H3) Adonike v. State (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 11; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1458) 237

 

RES JUDICATA - Appeals - Application - Parties and subject matter in present appeal being different from the previous appeal - CA was wrong to apply the principle of res judicata (H2) Ogbolosingha v. Bayelsa S.I.E.C. (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 461; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1455) 311

 

RES JUDICATA - Appeals - Locus standi - Appellant is stopped per rem judicatam - From bringing same case before the court - As he cannot question conduct of election - In which he did not participate (H5) Sylva v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1067; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1486) 576

 

RES JUDICATA - Application - Conditions - For the plea to succeed - Parties must be the same in the two cases - Issues and subject matter must be the same - And judgment must be valid (H1) Omokhafe v. Esekhomo (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2783; (1993) 8 NWLR (Pt.309) 58

 

RES JUDICATA - Election petitions - Judgment - Validity - Res judicata - As judgment of trial Tribunal is valid and not set aside - Appellant cannot appeal on same subject matter without his political party (H2) Agbaje v. INEC (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3223; (2016) 4 NWLR (Pt.1501) 151

 

RES JUDICATA - Judgment - Issue - Authenticity of the certificate having been settled to finality in the earlier case - Appellant is estopped from raising the issue in any other case (H7) APC v. PDP (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1179; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1481) 1

 

RES JUDICATA - Maritime - Issue - Conditions for application of the doctrine are not available - Since neither the parties nor subject matter of the proceedings in England - Are the same in this appeal (H3) Oleksandr v. Lonestar Drilling Co. Ltd. (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1301; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1464) 337

 

RES JUDICATA - Plea - Condition - Party relying on the plea must establish inter alia that the parties and subject matter are the same - That the decision is valid and final - And that court has jurisdiction (H1) Ogbolosingha v. Bayelsa S.I.E.C. (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 461; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1455) 311

 

ROBBERY - Conviction - Even if Exhibit E was expunged from the record - There was still evidence to find guilt of robbery - Hence appellant was rightly convicted for robbery (H1) Pius v. State (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1053; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1459) 628

 

ROBBERY - Stolen item - Recent possession - Since the items were found with appellant after the robbery - It is presumed that he was one of the robbers - Or knew that the goods were stolen properties (H6) Mohammed v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 439

 

RULES OF COURT - Appeals - Grounds - CA Rules - Adherence to - Appellants having not been misled by content of the 1st & 2nd grounds - There has been substantial compliance with O. 6 r. 2(2)(3) of the Rules (H5) Akpamgbo-Okadigbo v. Chidi (2) (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 759; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 124

 

RULES OF COURT - Appeals - Notice - Filing - Non compliance with CA Rules O. 3 r. 2(1) - As to the venue to file appeal - Would only confer right to ask the court - To pronounce the notice void (H1) Obi v. INEC (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2773; (2009) 18 NWLR (Pt.1172) 215

 

RULES OF COURT - Appeals - Notice of - CA Rules O. 6 r. 2(1) - Every appeal shall be initiated through a notice of appeal - And any defect in it would render the appeal incompetent (H2) Ikechukwu v. FRN (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 845; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 1

 

RULES OF COURT - Appeals - Preliminary objection - Basis - Under SC Rules 1999 preliminary objection is not restricted to grounds of law or facts - And even if affidavit is struck out - Grounds for the objection is intact (H2) PPA v. INEC (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2941; (2012) 13 NWLR (Pt.1317) 215

 

RULES OF COURT - Appeals - Preliminary objection - Incorporated in brief - CA Rules O. 3 r. 15 - Notice of the objection raised in brief - To which appellant has reacted - Is sufficient compliance with the rule (H1) Wema Securities & Finance Plc. v. Nig. Agric. Insu. Corp. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2557; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 93

 

RULES OF COURT - Appeals - Record - Compilation - CA Rules 2007 - Appellant can compile record upon failure of registrar to do so - And respondent in such a situation is at liberty to compile additional records (H3) Michael v. Bank of the North (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1711; (2015) 12 NWLR (Pt.1473) 370

 

RULES OF COURT - Compliance with - The rules are to be obeyed - And in the event of non compliance which is not explained - Court must not grant any indulgence (H4) Ifeanyichukwu Trad. Invest. Ven. Ltd. v. Onyesom Comm. Bank (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2183; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1487) 1

 

RULES OF COURT - Constitution - Supremacy of - With regard to joinder of appellants in the matter - 1999 Constitution s. 1(1)(3) prevails over FHC Rules O. 9 r. 14(1) (H5) Akpamgbo-Okadigbo v. Chidi (1) (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 953; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 124

 

RULES OF COURT - Courts - Legislation - Interpretation - Justice - Court does not read provisions of enactment in a way to deny litigant access to justice - As court is guided by its rule in conduct of its business (H10) S.P.D.C. Nig. Ltd. v. Agbara (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3707; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1496) 353

 

RULES OF COURT - Fundamental rights - Public document - Attachment of -Though words used in O. 3 r. 1 of the Rules are discretionary - There is still need to attach the proceedings - To arrive at a fair decision (H1) Onyekwuluje v. Benue State Govt. (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2043; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 40

 

RULES OF COURT - Non compliance - Effect - Every non compliance does not vitiate proceedings - But where court is robbed of jurisdiction - Processes and proceedings must be set aside (H3) Ihedioha v. Okorocha (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3287; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1492) 147

 

RULES OF COURT - Non compliance with - Court will not abandon its jurisdiction because of non compliance - As the rules should not be means of compromising right of appeal (H3) Odom v. PDP (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 677; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1456) 527

 

RULES OF COURT - Objections - Preliminary objection - Filing - Conditions - SC Rules O. 2 r. 9(1) - Relying on the mandatory provisions of r. 9(1) will amount to technicality and breed injustice (H1) Odedo v. PDP (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2007

 

RULES OF COURT - Orders of court - Justice - Need to uphold - Pursuant to Plateau State HC Rules O. 47 r. 1 - Order made by CA did not make new case for the parties - Rather it was made to do justice (H14) Kayih v. Yilbuk (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 625; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 26

 

RULES OF COURT - Supreme Court - Judgment - Amendment of - SC Rules O. 8 r. 16 - SC can in appropriate cases vary its judgment - To give effect to the judgment and in the interest of justice (H2) Jev v. Iyortom (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 601; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1483) 484

 

RULES OF COURT - Supreme Court - Stay of execution - Grant of - SC may by virtue of s. 24 of its Act - Order stay of execution either unconditionally - Or conditionally subject to rules of the court (H5) Iragbiji v. Oyewole (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3099; (2013) 13 NWLR (Pt.1372) 566

 

SIGNATURE - Confession - Voluntariness of - 1st respondent admission of having voluntarily signed the statement - Was tantamount to a confession which is the best form of evidence (H5) FRN v. Dairo (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 211; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1454) 141

 

SIGNATURE - Evidence - Admission - Weight - Prosecution need not prove voluntariness - As 3rd accused admission of having voluntarily signed the statement was tantamount to a confession (H3) FRN v. Borishade (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 81; (2015) 5 NWLR (Pt.1451) 155

 

SIGNATURE - Legal practitioners - Abbreviated name - Processes signed in such name by qualified legal practitioner are not invalid - As nothing in LPA s. 2(1) prohibits the use of initials (H3) Dankwambo v. Abubakar (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3237; (2016) 2 NWLR (Pt.1495) 157

 

SIGNATURE - Legal practitioners - Court process - Signing of - Appellant’s statements of claim on which evidence was led were nullity - Same having been signed by person not entitled to practice as barrister and solicitor (H2) Hamzat v. Sanni (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 253; (2015) 5 NWLR (Pt.1453) 486

 

SIGNATURE - Legal practitioners - Stamp & seal - Rules of Professional Conduct 2007 r. 10(1) - Effect of not fixing the approved seal & stamp - Is that document is deemed not to have been properly signed - But not incompetent (H3) Yaki v. Bagudu (2015) 11 KLR (pt. 374) 3503; (2015) 18 NWLR (Pt.1491) 288

 

SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE - Land - The sale of the land being invalid - Specific performance cannot be ordered as there is nothing to enforce (H8) Ogundalu v. Macjob (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1021; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1460) 96

 

STATUTES - Actions - Commencement - Limitation - Public Officers Protection Act - The plea can be raised by any of the respondents - And a successful defence under the Act ousts jurisdiction of court (H1) Sylva v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1067; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1486) 576

 

STATUTES - Actions ­- Commencement - Statute bar - By virtue of P.O.P. Law s. 2 - Respondent’s action is not statute barred - Since it was filed within three months after his cause of action arose (H6) CBN v. Okojie (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2149; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1479) 231

 

STATUTES - Actions - Determination - Basis - Cases are decided on their peculiar facts - And in the light of the applicable law - As every case is an authority for the facts which it decides (H2) Dankwambo v. Abubakar (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3237; (2016) 2 NWLR (Pt.1495) 157

 

STATUTES - Actions - Limitation - Public Officers Protection Act - Application - For s. 2 of the Act to avail a party - It must be shown that defendant is public officer - Who acted in pursuance of public duty (H3) Ibrahim v. Lawal (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 1949; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 490

 

STATUTES - Actions - Limitation - Public Officers’ Protection Act - Where a law prescribes a period for instituting action - Proceedings cannot be instituted after that period (H1) Ibrahim v. Lawal (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 1949; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 490

 

STATUTES - Actions - Limitation law - Effect - Subject to the exception provided in P.O.P Act s. 2(a) - The law extinguishes cause of action - If it is commenced after the stipulated period of three months (H2) INEC v. Ogbadibo L. G. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2399; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1498) 167

 

STATUTES - Admiralty - Jurisdiction - Prior to promulgation of Decree no. 59 of 1991 - State HC can by virtue of unlimited jurisdiction conferred on it by Constitution 1979 - Exercise concurrent jurisdiction in respect of matters under FHC Act s. 7 (H1) SPDC Nig. Ltd. v. Anaro (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2281; (2015) 12 NWLR (Pt.1472) 122

 

STATUTES - Appeals - Striking out - SC Act ss. 22 & 26 - Where an appeal has been struck out - There is nothing upon which to invoke the sections - To hear and determine the appeal by SC (H5) Abah v. Monday (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1569; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1480) 569

 

STATUTES - Charges - Arraignment - Validity of - Since the charge contains 6 counts - It is unnecessary to read out and explain each count before plea is taken - Hence CPL s. 215 was fully complied with (H4) Mohammed v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 439

 

STATUTES - Constitution - Holistic interpretation - Entire provisions of the Constitution must be read together as a whole - In ensuring the enthronement of real intention of the framers (H1) Abegunde v. Ondo State H.A. (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1111; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1461) 314

 

STATUTES - Constitution - Interpretation - Where words used are clear and free from ambiguity - They should be given their natural meaning - Without any embellishment (H1) Assams v. Ararume (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3629; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1493) 368

 

STATUTES - Conviction - Written law - Constitution 1999 s. 36(12) - No person can be convicted for an offence - Unless that offence is defined and penalty prescribed in a written law (H5) Roda v. FRN (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 121; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1468) 427

 

STATUTES - Criminal procedure - Institution of - State A-G - Powers of - 1999 Constitution s. 211(1) - The A-G can validly commence criminal proceedings - For any offence created under an Act of NA (H2) Mohammed v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 439

 

STATUTES - Documents - Admissibility - Objection - Appellant is to raise issue of non compliance with E.A. s. 57 - When the document was sought to be tendered - But having failed to object - No miscarriage of justice was suffered (H8) Blessing v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1653; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 1

 

STATUTES - Elections - Preelection - SC order - Amendment of - The order made by this court in the earlier appeal is set aside - As SC is not one of the courts regulated by Electoral Act s. 141 (H3) Jev v. Iyortom (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 601; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1483) 484

 

STATUTES - Elections - Preelection - Where there is complaint about conduct of primaries - Court can by Electoral Act s. 87(9) - Examine if the election complied with the Act and constitution of the political party (H1) Akpamgbo-Okadigbo v. Chidi (1) (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 953; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 124

 

STATUTES - Elections - Primaries - Jurisdiction - Where dispute arises as to which of the primaries produced candidate for a political party - The matter is taken outside Electoral Act 2010 s. 87(4)(b)(ii), (c)(ii) & (9) (H2) Ugwu v. PDP (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 731; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1459) 478

 

STATUTES - Evidence - Proof - Evidence Act s. 149(a) - Import of - The subsection does not provide that particular witness must be called - Rather it proposes that particular evidence should be called (H4) Jua v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2873; (2010) 4 NWLR (Pt.1184) 217

 

STATUTES - Fair hearing - Public Officers Protection Act - Defence - A person cannot be said to have been given fair hearing - If he is not allowed to rely on the provisions of an Act of parliament as defence (H2) Sylva v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 361) 1067; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1486) 576

 

STATUTES - Federal High Court - Jurisdiction - Extent of - Exclusive jurisdiction of the court is tied to the listed items - And to others as may be conferred upon it by Act of the National Assembly (H3) Wema Securities & Finance Plc. v. Nig. Agric. Insu. Corp. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2557; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 93

 

STATUTES - Interpretation - Literary rule - Courts must interpret the law within the context of its constitutive words - And refrain from seeking the meaning outside the clear words used by legislators (H6) Nobis-Elendu v. INEC (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 1981; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1485) 197

 

STATUTES - Interpretation - Principle - Provisions of statute is not construed in a way as to defeat intention of legislature - Or to defeat the ends it was meant to serve (H5) Nyesom v. Peterside (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3361; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1492) 71

 

STATUTES - Interpretation - Principle - Provisions of statute must be read and construed together - Unless there is reason why a particular provision should be read independently (H4) Nobis-Elendu v. INEC (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 1981; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1485) 197

 

STATUTES - Interpretation - Principle - Where words of statute are unambiguous - They must be given their ordinary meaning - Save where it will lead to absurdity or inconsistency with rest of the statute (H1) Dankwambo v. Abubakar (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3237; (2016) 2 NWLR (Pt.1495) 157

 

STATUTES - Interpretation - Rights of action - Courts must jealously guard their jurisdiction in protecting statutorily vested rights - If a provision of same statute appears to derogate from such rights (H5) Nobis-Elendu v. INEC (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 1981; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1485) 197

 

STATUTES - Legal practitioners - Abbreviated name - Processes signed in such name by qualified legal practitioner are not invalid - As nothing in LPA s. 2(1) prohibits the use of initials (H3) Dankwambo v. Abubakar (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3237; (2016) 2 NWLR (Pt.1495) 157

 

STATUTES - Limitation law - Effect - Such a statute takes away right to seek remedy in enforcement of the accrued right in court - Leaving the right bare and untouched (H1) ACN v. INEC (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3031; (2013) 13 NWLR (Pt.1370) 161

 

STATUTES - Maritime law - Fishing - Right of - Regulations - Legal Notice Regulation 4(5) was not meant to take away the right - But to regulate exercise of same (H2) Sakati v. Bako (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2085; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1480) 531

 

STATUTES - Public holidays - Public Holidays Act s. 1 recognizes only days listed in schedule to the Act as holidays - And courts are bound under Evidence Act 2011 s. 122(g) - To take judicial notice of such days (H5) Onyekwuluje v. Benue State Govt. (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2043; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 40

 

STATUTES - Public Officers Protection Act - Application of - S. 2 of the Act does not apply to cases of contract - Otherwise it will negate the general principles of law of contract (H6) Wema Securities & Finance Plc. v. Nig. Agric. Insu. Corp. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2557; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 93

 

STATUTES - Supreme Court - Powers - Motions - Hearing of - SC Act s. 22 - As there are conditions for exercise of its powers - The court can invoke the section to determine the merit of the application (H4) Odedo v. PDP (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2007

 

STATUTES - Trial - Time - Robbery & Firearms Act s. 12(6) - Although there is right to fair hearing for accused - Where delay is occasioned before arraignment - The same will not invalidate the trial (H1) Mohammed v. State (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 358) 439

 

STATUTES - Words & phrases - Or - Interpretation of - By virtue of Interpretation Act s. 18(3) - The word ‘or’ and ‘other’ shall in any enactment - Be construed disjunctively and not as implying similarity (H1) Kabirikim v. Emefor (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2907; (2009) 14 NWLR (Pt.1162) 602

 

STATUTES - Words & phrases - Shall - Interpretation of - Use of “shall” in statutes does not always mean mandatory order - As it may in some situations have the permissive meaning of “may” (H4) Nyesom v. Peterside (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3361; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1492) 71

 

STAY OF EXECUTION - Grant of - Supreme Court - May by virtue of s. 24 of its Act - Order stay of execution either unconditionally - Or conditionally subject to rules of the court (H5) Iragbiji v. Oyewole (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3099; (2013) 13 NWLR (Pt.1372) 566

 

STEALING - Proof - Prosecution must prove inter alia that the thing stolen is capable of being stolen - That accused has intention to permanently deprive the owner of the thing (H1) Oyebanji v. State (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2255; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1479) 270

 

SUPREME COURT - Appeals - Concurrent findings - Except where there are strong reasons - Supreme Court does not interfere with such decisions of the lower courts (H3) Abirifon v. State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3021; (2013) 13 NWLR (Pt.1372) 587

 

SUPREME COURT - Appeals - Concurrent findings - Interference - As there has been a violation of some principles of law and procedure - Which created a miscarriage of justice - SC can rightly intervene (H3) Zakari v. Nigerian Army (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 363) 1533; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1487) 77

 

SUPREME COURT - Appeals - Concurrent findings - Supreme Court does not interfere with such findings - Unless the findings are perverse - Or there was serious error which resulted in miscarriage of justice (H3) Owhoruke v. COP (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2235; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1483) 557

 

SUPREME COURT - Appeals - Election petition - Time limit - SC cannot invoke SC Act s. 22 to save the appeal - As CA by effluxion of time lacks jurisdiction - To adjudicate on the appeal (H2) CPC v. Yuguda (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2859; (2013) 7 NWLR (Pt.1354) 450

 

SUPREME COURT - Appeals - Finding - Failure to appeal - As there is no further appeal to SC against the order made by CA - Dismissing appellant’s cross appeal - The finding is binding on all the parties (H7) Kayih v. Yilbuk (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 625; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1457) 26

 

SUPREME COURT - Appeals - Fresh issue - Leave - Having neither canvassed the relief at CA - Nor sought and obtained leave to raise same in SC - Appellant cannot be heard on the issue (H2) Odom v. PDP (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 677; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1456) 527

 

SUPREME COURT - Appeals ­- Fresh issue - Leave - Issue of whether the narcotic drug comes within meaning of NDLEA Act s. 11(c)(d) was not before CA - And cannot be raised in SC for the first time without leave (H2) Blessing v. FRN (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1653; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1475) 1

 

SUPREME COURT - Appeals - Fresh issue - Leave - Substantial issue not raised in lower court - Is not allowed to be raised for the first time in Supreme Court - Except with leave of the court (H6) Ibrahim v. Lawal (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 1949; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 490

 

SUPREME COURT - Appeals - Grounds - Competence of - By virtue of Constitution 1999 s. 233(2)(a) - Appeal will lie as of right to SC on ground 7 - Which questions the jurisdiction of CA to determine the suit (H3) Iragbiji v. Oyewole (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3099; (2013) 13 NWLR (Pt.1372) 566

 

SUPREME COURT - Appeals - Hearing - Limit - The court hears appeals from valid judgments of CA - And having held a part of CA’s decision as nullity - It has no jurisdiction to determine appellant’s issue (H3) Ominiyi v. Alabi (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 711; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1456) 572

 

SUPREME COURT - Appeals - Notice - Failure to sign - Notice must be signed personally by appellant in criminal appeals - Otherwise there is no competent appeal - And the court has no jurisdiction (H2) Ikuepenikan v. State (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1273; (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt.1465) 518

 

SUPREME COURT - Appeals - Striking out - SC Act ss. 22 & 26 - Where an appeal has been struck out - There is nothing upon which to invoke the sections - To hear and determine the appeal by SC (H5) Abah v. Monday (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 364) 1569; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1480) 569

 

SUPREME COURT - Election petitions - Gubernatorial - Final court - Constitution 1999 s. 246 deprives SC of jurisdiction - To deal with gubernatorial election petition - As CA is the final court (H1) Sha’aban v. Sambo (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2975; (2010) 19 NWLR (Pt.1226) 353

 

SUPREME COURT - Election petitions - Hearing - Time limit - The appeal is statute barred by virtue of Constitution 1999 s. 285(7) - Hence Supreme Court has no jurisdiction to entertain it (H3) ACN v. INEC (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3031; (2013) 13 NWLR (Pt.1370) 161

 

SUPREME COURT - Elections - Preelection - SC order - Amendment of - The order made by this court in the earlier appeal is set aside - As SC is not one of the courts regulated by Electoral Act s. 141 (H3) Jev v. Iyortom (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 601; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1483) 484

 

SUPREME COURT - Evidence - Crime - Evaluation - Correctness of - Evaluation of the trial Judge is unassailable as there is nothing to show perversity - Hence Supreme Court will not interfere (H4) Busari v. State (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 53; (2015) 5 NWLR (Pt.1452) 343

 

SUPREME COURT - Judgment - Amendment of - SC becomes functus officio once it has decided a matter - But may amend its judgment where there is error - That materially affects the decision (H2) Enterprise Bank Ltd v. Aroso (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1783; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1476) 306

 

SUPREME COURT - Judgment - Amendment of - SC Rules O. 8 r. 16 - SC can in appropriate cases vary its judgment - To give effect to the judgment and in the interest of justice (H2) Jev v. Iyortom (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 601; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1483) 484

 

SUPREME COURT - Judgment - Binding nature of - Decisions of SC are binding on all courts - But where there are conflicts in the decisions - All courts are bound by its latest decision (H9) CBN v. Okojie (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2149; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1479) 231

 

SUPREME COURT - Judgment - Interference - Reason to invoke the jurisdiction of the court - To interfere with its judgment - Does not arise in this case (H3) Obi v. INEC (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2773; (2009) 18 NWLR (Pt.1172) 215

 

SUPREME COURT - Judgment - Supremacy of - The court cannot sit on appeal over its judgment - And its power in appropriate cases to set aside its judgment - Does not amount to appellate jurisdiction (H1) Jev v. Iyortom (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 601; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1483) 484

 

SUPREME COURT - Judgment of - Supremacy s. 287(1) 1999 Constitution - Earlier decision same day - That nullifies a lower court’s decision - Binds SC in a subsequent same day matter - That can no more be continuation of the nullified case (H4) Akpamgbo-Okadigbo v. Chidi (2) (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 759; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 124

 

SUPREME COURT - Judgment sum - Mistake in - Error made by SC in calculating the judgment sum is hereby deleted - And corrected to reflect the figures applicants are entitled to H3) Enterprise Bank Ltd v. Aroso (2015) 5 KLR (pt. 365) 1783; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1476) 306

 

SUPREME COURT - Judicial precedents - Judgment of SC - Binding nature of -Decisions of SC on the same facts and legislation as those canvassed in this matter - Are binding on it and Court of Appeal (H3) Abegunde v. Ondo State H.A. (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1111; (2015) 8 NWLR (Pt.1461) 314

 

SUPREME COURT - Jurisdiction - Fundamentality of - It is a question of law that can be raised as fresh issue on appeal even in SC - And there is no need for leave before it is properly raised (H1) MPPP v. INEC (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3335

 

SUPREME COURT - Jurisdiction - Issue of - When to raise - Question of jurisdiction can be raised at any time of the proceedings - Even for the first time in Supreme Court (H1) Hamzat v. Sanni (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 253; (2015) 5 NWLR (Pt.1453) 486

 

SUPREME COURT - Murder - Appeals - Fresh issue - Validity of - Although the issue of absence of appellant is fresh in SC - The court allowed same because of the criminal trial which attracted highest sentence (H3) Mohammad v. State (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 101

 

SUPREME COURT - Powers - Motions - Hearing of - SC Act s. 22 - As there are conditions for exercise of its powers - The court can invoke the section to determine the merit of the application (H4) Odedo v. PDP (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2007

 

SUPREME COURT - Stay of execution - Grant of - SC may by virtue of s. 24 of its Act - Order stay of execution either unconditionally - Or conditionally subject to rules of the court (H5) Iragbiji v. Oyewole (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3099; (2013) 13 NWLR (Pt.1372) 566

 

SURVEY PLAN - Land law - Identity of land - Proof - Appellants having failed to prove the identity of the land in dispute - CA was right when it found that their claim cannot succeed (H4) Addah v. Ubandawaki (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 183; (2015) 7 NWLR (Pt.1458) 325

 

TECHNICALITIES - Appeals - Notices of appeal - Consolidation of - CA having granted 1st respondent leave to consolidate - The contention that reliance was placed on the two notices in same appeal is of no moment (H3) FRN v. Dairo (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 211; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1454) 141

 

TECHNICALITIES - Damages - Exemplary damages - Proof - Claim for such damages need not be pleaded expressly - It is enough if facts in the pleadings support award of the damages (H7) CBN v. Okojie (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2149; (2015) 14 NWLR (Pt.1479) 231

 

TECHNICALITIES - Jurisdiction - Rules of court - Non compliance with - Court will not abandon its jurisdiction because of non compliance - As the rules should not be means of compromising right of appeal (H3) Odom v. PDP (2015) 2 KLR (pt. 359) 677; (2015) 6 NWLR (Pt.1456) 527

 

TECHNICALITIES - Objections - Preliminary objection - Filing - Conditions - SC Rules O. 2 r. 9(1) - Relying on the mandatory provisions of r. 9(1) will amount to technicality and breed injustice (H1) Odedo v. PDP (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2007

 

TORTS - Maritime law - Oil spillage - Negligence - Rylands v. Fletcher - In respect of damages resulting from escape of oil waste - CA’s affirmation of trial court on res ipsa loquitur - And the rule in the case law cannot be faulted (H4) SPDC Nig. Ltd. v. Anaro (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2281; (2015) 12 NWLR (Pt.1472) 122

 

TRESPASS - Land law - Locus standi - Having established interest in the matter - Respondent has locus to defend a case of trespass into his family land (H1) Jitte v. Okpulor (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3649; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1497) 542

 

TRESPASS - Land law - Reliefs - Extent of - Respondent did not only require the court to grant him declaration to title - He also claimed for disturbance of his possessory right (H4) Jitte v. Okpulor (2015) 12 KLR (pt. 375) 3649; (2016) 2 NWLR (PT.1497) 542

 

TRESPASS - Property law - Injunction - Order of injunction granted is of a consequential nature - Made to protect plaintiff against 3rd defendant - Who is now a trespasser (H2) Briggs v. Chief Lands Officer Rivers State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2703; (2005) 12 NWLR (Pt.938) 59

 

TRIBUNALS - Appeals - Election petitions - Issue - Appeal before CA relates to the petition - As dismissal of the petition by the trial Tribunal - Gave rise to the appeal before Court of Appeal (H5) Dankwambo v. Abubakar (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3237; (2016) 2 NWLR (Pt.1495) 157

 

TRIBUNALS - Appeals - Findings - Failure of appellant to raise ground against CA’s reliance on doctrine of necessity - In relocating the Tribunal - Is deemed to be an endorsement of stance of the court (H7) Nyesom v. Peterside (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3361; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1492) 71

 

TRIBUNALS - Appeals - Fresh issue - Leave - Fresh issue of impersonation introduced without compliance with the rules - Was properly struck out by the tribunal and rightly affirmed by CA (H8) APC v. PDP (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1179; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1481) 1

 

TRIBUNALS - Appeals - Issue - Determination - Appellant’s issue 1 on lack of jurisdiction of trial Tribunal - Is enough to dispose off the appeal (H4) MPPP v. INEC (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3335

 

TRIBUNALS - Courts - Supervision of - Application - For superior court to prevent tribunal from exceeding its jurisdiction - Applicant must present facts necessary to justify grant of the order sought (H4) Onyekwuluje v. Benue State Govt. (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2043; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 40

 

TRIBUNALS - Decision - Mistake in - Provided that the mistake in decision of a tribunal was committed within its jurisdiction - Superior court exercising supervisory jurisdiction - Cannot readily interfere (H3) Onyekwuluje v. Benue State Govt. (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 2043; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 40

 

TRIBUNALS - Election petitions - Composition - Consultation with the State CJ and President CCA by PCA - Is not precondition for constituting tribunal - Rather it is aimed at getting eligible members (H3) Nyesom v. Peterside (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3361; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1492) 71

 

TRIBUNALS - Election petitions - Composition of - Constitution 1999 s. 285(4) - The Tribunal was not properly constituted to determine the petition - Hence any decision it reached was a nullity (H3) MPPP v. INEC (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3335

 

TRIBUNALS - Election petitions - Dismissal - Effect of dismissal of 1st respondent’s petition by the Tribunal - Is that his right to challenge the election of the Governor and Deputy Governor of the State is truncated (H6) Dankwambo v. Abubakar (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3237; (2016) 2 NWLR (Pt.1495) 157

 

TRIBUNALS - Election petitions - Establishment of - The Tribunal having been established under Constitution 1999 s. 285(2) - The act of its establishment cannot be said to be a futuristic event (H2) Nyesom v. Peterside (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3361; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1492) 71

 

TRIBUNALS - Election petitions - Jurisdiction - 1999 Constitution s. 285 - FHC lacks jurisdiction to entertain appellant’s suit - As the matter clearly belongs to Election Petition Tribunal (H1) ANPP v. Returning Officer Abia State (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2855; (2007) 11 NWLR (Pt.1045) 431

 

TRIBUNALS - Election petitions - Nomination - Jurisdiction - After the conduct of an election - A person wishing to challenge result of the election on ground of nomination - Can do so at election tribunal under EA 2010 s. 138(1)(a) (H3) Wambai v. Donatus (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 372) 3163; (2014) 14 NWLR (Pt.1427) 223

 

TRIBUNALS - Election petitions - Relocation of - In view of security challenges in the State - PCA rightly applied doctrine of necessity - To relocate the Tribunal from the State to Abuja (H6) Nyesom v. Peterside (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3361; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1492) 71

 

TRIBUNALS - Election petitions - Validity - Res judicata - As judgment of trial Tribunal is valid and not set aside - Appellant cannot appeal on same subject matter without his political party (H2) Agbaje v. INEC (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3223; (2016) 4 NWLR (Pt.1501) 151

 

TRIBUNALS - Elections - Action - Mandatory injunction - 1st to 5th respondents’ quest for the injunction in respect of election matter - Filed at HC instead of election tribunal - Is not maintainable in law (H3) Akpamgbo-Okadigbo v. Chidi (2) (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 759; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 124

 

TRIBUNALS - Elections - Gubernatorial - Jurisdiction - Proper forum to determine appellant’s challenge of the return of 3rd respondent - Is the Governorship Election Tribunal (H3) James v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 863; (2015) 12 NWLR (Pt.1474) 538

 

TRIBUNALS - Elections - House of assembly - Jurisdiction - From the nature of the cause of action - 1st to 5th respondents’ claim can only be maintained as a petition filed at the election petition tribunal (H2) Akpamgbo-Okadigbo v. Chidi (2) (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 759; (2015) 10 NWLR (Pt.1466) 124

 

TRIBUNALS - Elections - Time - Sui generis - Time is of essence in election matters - Hence the delay of more than 3 months to raise appellant’s complaint - Made the matter a post election one to be determined at the Tribunal (H5) James v. INEC (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 863; (2015) 12 NWLR (Pt.1474) 538

 

TRIBUNALS - Impeachment panel - Finding - Ekiti State HA violated 1999 Constitution s. 188(8) by setting up second panel - Hence proceedings conducted by the panel was exercise in futility (H5) APC v. PDP (2015) 4 KLR (pt. 362) 1179; (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt.1481) 1

 

TRIBUNALS - Jurisdiction - Sources - Jurisdiction of Election Tribunal and Court of Appeal in respect of election petitions - Is derived from the Constitution 1999 (as amended) (H4) Dankwambo v. Abubakar (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3237; (2016) 2 NWLR (Pt.1495) 157

 

UNDEFENDED SUITS - Actions - Commencement - Wrongful procedure - The claim not being for debt or liquidated money demand - Disqualified the case from being heard under the undefended list procedure (H1) Gambo v. Ikechukwu (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2869; (2011) 17 NWLR (Pt.1277) 561

 

UNDEFENDED SUITS - Debt - Acknowledgment of - Failure of appellants to file affidavit with notice of intention to defend - Was clear admission of indebtedness and the sum claimed (H5) Ifeanyichukwu Trad. Invest. Ven. Ltd. v. Onyesom Comm. Bank (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2183; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1487) 1

 

UNDEFENDED SUITS - Defence - Affidavit in support - Of notice of intention to defend must disclose facts - Which throw some doubt on plaintiff’s case (H8) Wema Securities & Finance Plc. v. Nig. Agric. Insu. Corp. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2557; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 93

 

UNDEFENDED SUITS - Defence on merit - Transfer to general list - Where there is such defence - Justice demands that the matter be transferred to general cause list - For hearing on the pleadings (H9) Wema Securities & Finance Plc. v. Nig. Agric. Insu. Corp. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2557; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 93

 

UNDEFENDED SUITS - Notice of defence - Failure to file - Once defendant fails to deliver the notice and affidavit in support - Plaintiff is entitled to judgment (H3) Ifeanyichukwu Trad. Invest. Ven. Ltd. v. Onyesom Comm. Bank (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2183; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1487) 1

 

UNDEFENDED SUITS - Notice of defence - Filing - Defendant must file notice of intention to defend the suit and affidavit in support - And once triable issue is disclosed - Suit is transferred to general list (H2) Ifeanyichukwu Trad. Invest. Ven. Ltd. v. Onyesom Comm. Bank (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2183; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1487) 1

 

UNDEFENDED SUITS - Objective of - It enables court to deal summarily with plaintiff’s claim and enter quick judgment - Once there is no defence on merit - Thereby saving time and cost (H1) Ifeanyichukwu Trad. Invest. Ven. Ltd. v. Onyesom Comm. Bank (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2183; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1487) 1

 

UNDEFENDED SUITS - Objective of - It is used where the claim is for liquidated money demand - To secure quick justice especially when there is no genuine defence on the merit (H7) Wema Securities & Finance Plc. v. Nig. Agric. Insu. Corp. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2557; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 93

 

UNIVERSITY - Confession - Objection - 3rd accused being a University graduate - Ought to know the import of the claim that a statement was made involuntarily (H1) FRN v. Borishade (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 81; (2015) 5 NWLR (Pt.1451) 155

 

WAIVER - Appeals - Notice - Filing - Non compliance - Waiver - 5th respondent having failed to object to the irregularity in filing of the notice - Cannot now be allowed to complain of an occurrence he had thought little of (H2) Obi v. INEC (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2773; (2009) 18 NWLR (Pt.1172) 215

 

WAIVER - Courts - Procedure - Irregularity in - Waiver - Where party at trial consented to a procedure which is merely wrong - It is late to complain against same on appeal - Simply because he lost the case (H6) Unity Life & Fire Insurance Ltd. v. Int’l Bank of W. Africa (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 370) 2821; (2001) 7 NWLR (Pt.713) 610

 

WORDS & PHRASES - Conspiracy - Meaning of - It is an agreement of two or more persons - To do an act which is an offence - Which agreement need not be physical (H3) Busari v. State (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 53; (2015) 5 NWLR (Pt.1452) 343

 

WORDS & PHRASES - Corroboration - Meaning of - For evidence to be corroborative - It must be an independent testimony which affects accused - By connecting or tending to connect him with the crime (H5) State v. Gwan (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2469; (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt.1477) 600

 

WORDS & PHRASES - Or - Interpretation of - By virtue of Interpretation Act s. 18(3) - The word ‘or’ and ‘other’ shall in any enactment - Be construed disjunctively and not as implying similarity (H1) Kabirikim v. Emefor (2015) 9 KLR (pt. 371) 2907; (2009) 14 NWLR (Pt.1162) 602

 

WORDS & PHRASES - Shall - Interpretation of - Use of “shall” in statutes does not always mean mandatory order - As it may in some situations have the permissive meaning of “may” (H4) Nyesom v. Peterside (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3361; (2016) 1 NWLR (PT.1492) 71

 

WORDS & PHRASES - Statutes - Interpretation - Principle - Where words of statute are unambiguous - They must be given their ordinary meaning - Save where it will lead to absurdity or inconsistency with rest of the statute (H1) Dankwambo v. Abubakar (2015) 10 KLR (pt. 373) 3237; (2016) 2 NWLR (Pt.1495) 157

 

WRIT OF SUMMONS - Actions - Limitation - Determination - Basis - Writ of summons and statement of claim are to be considered - To see when the wrong was committed (H2) Ibrahim v. Lawal (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 366) 1949; (2015) 17 NWLR (Pt.1489) 490

 

WRIT OF SUMMONS - Interests - Claim of - Where interest is claimed as a matter of right - Proper practice is to claim entitlement to it on the writ - And plead facts which show such entitlement in statement of claim (H10) Wema Securities & Finance Plc. v. Nig. Agric. Insu. Corp. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2557; (2015) 16 NWLR (Pt.1484) 93

 

WRIT OF SUMMONS - Jurisdiction - Determination of - Basis - Jurisdiction is determined by plaintiff’s claim - As endorsed in the writ of summons and statement of claim (H1) Sun Insu. Nig. Plc. v. Umez Eng. Const. Co Ltd. (2015) 6 KLR (pt. 367) 2319; (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt.1471) 576

 

WRIT OF SUMMONS - Locus standi - Proof - Plaintiff is said to have shown sufficient interest - Once he has right or vested interest to protect and enforce - Which has been disclosed in the writ and statement of claim (H1) INEC v. Ogbadibo L. G. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2399; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1498) 167

 

 

ACTIONS - Banking - Cheque - Libelous endorsement - Reliefs - Where such exists in addition to dishonour of cheque - Customer can in the same action - Claim for damages for breach of contract and for libel (H6) Citibank Nig. Ltd. v. Ikediashi (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 273 CA

 

ACTIONS - Contract - Breach - Damages - In action for breach hinged on dishonoured cheque - Claimant is entitled to award of nominal damages - Unless he pleads specific damages suffered (H7) Citibank Nig. Ltd. v. Ikediashi (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 273 CA

 

ACTIONS - Court processes - Abuse - Characteristics - It shows itself in the institution of multiple actions on the same subject matter - Against the same parties (H1) Okorie v. Chukwu (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 305 CA

 

ACTIONS - Courts - Action - Hearing - Nothing prevents the court from determining the respondent’s case - Hence argument that the substantive suit was not ripe for hearing is of no moment (H7) Exec. Gov. of Osun State v. Folorunsho (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2497 CA

 

ACTIONS - Limitation law - Purpose - It is to protect defendant from injustice of facing a stale claim - In view of the likelihood that evidence which was earlier available - May have faded (H5) Exec. Gov. of Osun State v. Folorunsho (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2497 CA

 

ACTIONS - Objections - Preliminary objection - Limitation law - Pleadings - Substance of the objection is a special defence - Which must be pleaded specifically by party - Before relying on same (H4) Exec. Gov. of Osun State v. Folorunsho (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2497 CA

 

ACTIONS - Objections - Preliminary objection - Purpose - The objective is to terminate a case at the preliminary stage - So that only issues that are free from known legal handicap go to trial (H1) Exec. Gov. of Osun State v. Folorunsho (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2497 CA

 

ACTIONS - Orders of court - Non suit - Condition for - It is made where it appears on the record that plaintiff’s case has not wholly failed - And that in any case defendant would not be entitled to judgment (H1) Nwakalor v. Kalambe (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 921 CA

 

ACTIONS - Statutes - Limitation law - Being a civil servant in Osun State - Trial court rightly held that it is the State’s law and not the Federal enactment - That applies to employment of respondent (H8) Exec. Gov. of Osun State v. Folorunsho (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2497 CA

 

ADJOURNMENTS - Grant - Discretion lies with trial court - Which must exercise same judicially and judiciously - Deciding on competing issues of justice and of speedy determination of the issues (H9) Exec. Gov. of Osun State v. Folorunsho (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2497 CA

 

AGENCY - Banking - Customer - Relationship - Is that of principal and agent - Thus cheque drawn on banker by customer constitutes the order of principal to agent - To pay out his money in custody of the agent (H1) Citibank Nig. Ltd. v. Ikediashi (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 273 CA

 

AGENCY - Principal & agent - Relationship - Arises where principal consents that agent shall act on his behalf - And agent consents so to act (H1) New Age Beverage Co. Ltd. v. Aramide (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 163 CA

 

AGREEMENTS - Parties - Contract - Binding nature - Parties to written contract are mutually bound by terms therein - And court has duty to enforce same - Provided that they are not illegal or contrary to public policy (H5) Citibank Nig. Ltd. v. Ikediashi (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 273 CA

 

ALIBI - Particulars - Proof - Accused who raises the defence - Must give particulars of his whereabouts at the time the offence was committed - So as to assist police in their investigation (H5) Iduwe v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2615 CA

 

ALIBI - Plea of - Validity - Exhibits A & C having fixed appellant at the crime scene - His plea was rightly rejected - Since where there is direct participation in a crime - The plea is negated (H6) Iduwe v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2615 CA

 

APPEALS - Court of Appeal - Jurisdiction - CA is barred from entertaining appeal from Customary Court of Appeal - Except same rests on issues of Customary Law (H2) Okorie v. Chukwu (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 305 CA

 

APPEALS - Courts - Discretion - Cost - Award - Discretion is that of trial court - Which must exercise same judiciously and judicially - And appellate court should be wary to interfere (H11) Citibank Nig. Ltd. v. Ikediashi (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 273 CA

 

APPEALS - Evidence - Evaluation - Trial court ascribes credibility to evidence of witnesses - And where findings of facts are not perverse - Appellate court cannot interfere with them (H6) Enterprise Bank Ltd. v. Amao (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2595 CA

 

APPEALS - Grounds - Competence - Any ground formulated but not argued is deemed abandoned - And it is treated as never existed (H1) Enterprise Bank Ltd. v. Amao (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2595 CA

 

APPEALS - Jurisdiction - Fundamentality of - It is a threshold issue that can be raised at any stage even for first time on appeal - And absence of same renders the entire proceeding a nullity (H4) Seplat Petro. Dev. v. Brittania-U Nig. Ltd. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2643 CA

 

APPEALS - Record - Compilation of - CA Rules O. 8 r. 1 - Duty is on Registrar of HC to compile record - But appellant is only required to do so after expiration of 60 days - And if the Registrar failed to act (H1) Seplat Petro. Dev. v. Brittania-U Nig. Ltd. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2643 CA

 

APPEALS - Record - Verification of - Parties to an appeal are required to appear to settle record - And where a party declines to attend - He should not turn around to challenge the compilation (H2) Seplat Petro. Dev. v. Brittania-U Nig. Ltd. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2643 CA

 

APPEALS - Record - Where not complete - Appellate court cannot hear an appeal with incomplete records - As such incomplete record affects the competence of the court (H3) Seplat Petro. Dev. v. Brittania-U Nig. Ltd. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2643 CA

 

APPEALS - Respondent’s notice - Objection to - Appellant seeking to oppose the notice must file preliminary objection - And he is not allowed to raise the objection in his brief (H9) Seplat Petro. Dev. v. Brittania-U Nig. Ltd. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2643 CA

 

APPEALS - Respondent’s notice - Validity of - As there was no where in the record that bears the claim of 1st respondent - CA cannot determine such claim on appeal (H10) Seplat Petro. Dev. v. Brittania-U Nig. Ltd. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2643 CA

 

BANKING - Account - Notice of closure - Notice was not justifiably given to respondent - As he can only be deemed to have received notice via registered post - Upon the signing or collection from post office (H3) Citibank Nig. Ltd. v. Ikediashi (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 273 CA

 

BANKING - Account - Notice of closure - Time limit - Notice given to respondent 2 weeks after closure of his account - Is a breach of clause 7 of Exhibit C - That provides for at least 7 days prior notice (H4) Citibank Nig. Ltd. v. Ikediashi (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 273 CA

 

BANKING - Actions - Contract - Breach - Damages - In action for breach hinged on dishonoured cheque - Claimant is entitled to award of nominal damages - Unless he pleads specific damages suffered (H7) Citibank Nig. Ltd. v. Ikediashi (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 273 CA

 

BANKING - Cheque - Libelous endorsement - Reliefs - Where such exists in addition to dishonour of cheque - Customer can in the same action - Claim for damages for breach of contract and for libel (H6) Citibank Nig. Ltd. v. Ikediashi (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 273 CA

 

BANKING - Cheque - Payment of - Denial of customer’s cheque - When he has to his credit an amount endorsed therein - Is a breach of contract for which banker is liable in damages (H2) Citibank Nig. Ltd. v. Ikediashi (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 273 CA

 

BANKING - Customer - Relationship - Is that of principal and agent - Thus cheque drawn on banker by customer constitutes the order of principal to agent - To pay out his money in custody of the agent (H1) Citibank Nig. Ltd. v. Ikediashi (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 273 CA

 

BANKING - Defamation - Qualified privilege - Defence - Due notice not given to respondent prior to closure of his account - It follows that the publication - Which constitutes libel cannot justify the defence (H13) Citibank Nig. Ltd. v. Ikediashi (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 273 CA

 

CERTIORARI - Conditions for - The relief is available where there is lack or excess of jurisdiction - Error on the face of record - And breach of fair hearing (H3) Okorie v. Chukwu (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 305 CA

 

COMMERCIAL LAW - Contracts - Binding contract - Evidence of payments for the goods ordered and supplied - Are proof of a binding commercial transaction - And justify the finding in debt by the trial Judge (H2) New Age Beverage Co. Ltd. v. Aramide (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 163 CA

 

CONFLICT OF LAWS - Statutes - Limitation law - Being a civil servant in Osun State - Trial court rightly held that it is the State’s law and not the Federal enactment - That applies to employment of respondent (H8) Exec. Gov. of Osun State v. Folorunsho (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2497 CA

 

CONTRACTS - Actions - Breach - Damages - In action for breach hinged on dishonoured cheque - Claimant is entitled to award of nominal damages - Unless he pleads specific damages suffered (H7) Citibank Nig. Ltd. v. Ikediashi (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 273 CA

 

CONTRACTS - Agency - Principal & agent - Relationship - Arises where principal consents that agent shall act on his behalf - And agent consents so to act (H1) New Age Beverage Co. Ltd. v. Aramide (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 163 CA

 

CONTRACTS - Banking - Cheque - Libelous endorsement - Reliefs - Where such exists in addition to dishonour of cheque - Customer can in the same action - Claim for damages for breach of contract and for libel (H6) Citibank Nig. Ltd. v. Ikediashi (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 273 CA

 

CONTRACTS - Banking - Cheque - Payment of - Denial of customer’s cheque - When he has to his credit an amount endorsed therein - Is a breach of contract for which banker is liable in damages (H2) Citibank Nig. Ltd. v. Ikediashi (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 273 CA

 

CONTRACTS - Binding contract - Evidence of payments for the goods ordered and supplied - Are proof of a binding commercial transaction - And justify the finding in debt by the trial Judge (H2) New Age Beverage Co. Ltd. v. Aramide (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 163 CA

 

CONTRACTS - Breach - Banking - Account - Notice of closure - Time limit - Notice given to respondent 2 weeks after closure of his account - Is a breach of clause 7 of Exhibit C - That provides for at least 7 days prior notice (H4) Citibank Nig. Ltd. v. Ikediashi (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 273 CA

 

CONTRACTS - Breach - Libel - Damages - Award - Although it is elegant to separate the amount awarded for damages for breach and for libel - But no miscarriage of justice resulted from the non separation (H8) Citibank Nig. Ltd. v. Ikediashi (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 273 CA

 

CONTRACTS - Evidence - Fact in issue - There is no misdirection in the matter - As evidence by appellant’s witness was considered as admission of fact in issue - And not an issue of onus of proof (H3) New Age Beverage Co. Ltd. v. Aramide (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 163 CA

 

CONTRACTS - Parties - Binding nature - Parties to written contract are mutually bound by terms therein - And court has duty to enforce same - Provided that they are not illegal or contrary to public policy (H5) Citibank Nig. Ltd. v. Ikediashi (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 273 CA

 

CORROBORATION - Murder - Proof - Corroboration - Evidence of PW3 is unequivocal as to the cause of the death - And it corroborates appellant’s extrajudicial statements (H7) Iduwe v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2615 CA

 

COSTS - Award - Principles - Successful party is entitled to cost unless circumstances deprive him of same - But costs are not awarded as punitive measure against the losing party (H10) Citibank Nig. Ltd. v. Ikediashi (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 273 CA

 

COSTS - Courts - Discretion - Cost - Award - Discretion is that of trial court - Which must exercise same judiciously and judicially - And appellate court should be wary to interfere (H11) Citibank Nig. Ltd. v. Ikediashi (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 273 CA

 

COURT PROCESSES - Abuse - Characteristics - It shows itself in the institution of multiple actions on the same subject matter - Against the same parties (H1) Okorie v. Chukwu (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 305 CA

 

COURT PROCESSES - Appeals - Record - Compilation of - CA Rules O. 8 r. 1 - Duty is on Registrar of HC to compile record - But appellant is only required to do so after expiration of 60 days - And if the Registrar failed to act (H1) Seplat Petro. Dev. v. Brittania-U Nig. Ltd. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2643 CA

 

COURT PROCESSES - Appeals - Record - Verification of - Parties to an appeal are required to appear to settle record - And where a party declines to attend - He should not turn around to challenge the compilation (H2) Seplat Petro. Dev. v. Brittania-U Nig. Ltd. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2643 CA

 

COURTS - Action - Hearing - Nothing prevents the court from determining the respondent’s case - Hence argument that the substantive suit was not ripe for hearing is of no moment (H7) Exec. Gov. of Osun State v. Folorunsho (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2497 CA

 

COURTS - Adjournment - Grant - Discretion lies with trial court - Which must exercise same judicially and judiciously - Deciding on competing issues of justice and of speedy determination of the issues (H9) Exec. Gov. of Osun State v. Folorunsho (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2497 CA

 

COURTS - Appeals - Jurisdiction - CA is barred from entertaining appeal from Customary Court of Appeal - Except same rests on issues of Customary Law (H2) Okorie v. Chukwu (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 305 CA

 

COURTS - Appeals - Record - Where not complete - Appellate court cannot hear an appeal with incomplete records - As such incomplete record affects the competence of the court (H3) Seplat Petro. Dev. v. Brittania-U Nig. Ltd. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2643 CA

 

COURTS - Appeals - Respondent’s notice - Validity of - As there was no where in the record that bears the claim of 1st respondent - CA cannot determine such claim on appeal (H10) Seplat Petro. Dev. v. Brittania-U Nig. Ltd. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2643 CA

 

COURTS - Contracts - Binding contract - Evidence of payments for the goods ordered and supplied - Are proof of a binding commercial transaction - And justify the finding in debt by the trial Judge (H2) New Age Beverage Co. Ltd. v. Aramide (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 163 CA

 

COURTS - Contracts - Evidence - Fact in issue - There is no misdirection in the matter - As evidence by appellant’s witness was considered as admission of fact in issue - And not an issue of onus of proof (H3) New Age Beverage Co. Ltd. v. Aramide (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 163 CA

 

COURTS - Damages - General damages - Award - It is at discretion of trial court - And appellate court will not interfere - Unless inter alia trial court acted under mistake of law - And in disregard of principles (H9) Citibank Nig. Ltd. v. Ikediashi (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 273 CA

 

COURTS - Discretion - Cost - Award - Discretion is that of trial court - Which must exercise same judiciously and judicially - And appellate court should be wary to interfere (H11) Citibank Nig. Ltd. v. Ikediashi (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 273 CA

 

COURTS - Evidence - Evaluation - Trial court ascribes credibility to evidence of witnesses - And where findings of facts are not perverse - Appellate court cannot interfere with them (H6) Enterprise Bank Ltd. v. Amao (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2595 CA

 

COURTS - Fair hearing - Breach - Allegation of - Fairness is expected from both sides - Hence appellants cannot complain of denial of fair hearing - Having not been fair to the court and respondent (H10) Exec. Gov. of Osun State v. Folorunsho (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2497 CA

 

COURTS - Issue - Determination - It is not the duty of court to speculate on any matter - But to determine a case based on evidence before it (H7) Enterprise Bank Ltd. v. Amao (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2595 CA

 

COURTS - Jurisdiction - Absence of - Orders of court - Court must have jurisdiction before making a preservative order - Hence trial court erred by considering the application - When there is objection to its jurisdiction (H5) Seplat Petro. Dev. v. Brittania-U Nig. Ltd. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2643 CA

 

COURTS - Jurisdiction - Determination - Court has jurisdiction to determine - Whether it has jurisdiction to hear a case (H6) Exec. Gov. of Osun State v. Folorunsho (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2497 CA

 

COURTS - Orders of court - Non suit - Address of parties - Before the order can be made - Court must call on parties to address it on the propriety of making same - As failure to do so sets aside the order (H3) Nwakalor v. Kalambe (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 921 CA

 

COURTS - Orders of court - Non suit - Applicable laws - Before the order can be made by court - The Act establishing the court or rules governing its procedure - Must provide for the order (H2) Nwakalor v. Kalambe (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 921 CA

 

COURTS - Parties - Contract - Binding nature - Parties to written contract are mutually bound by terms therein - And court has duty to enforce same - Provided that they are not illegal or contrary to public policy (H5) Citibank Nig. Ltd. v. Ikediashi (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 273 CA

 

COURTS - Preliminary objection - Determination of - The trial court has discretion by O. 22 r. 2 of its Rules - To entertain any point of law raised in pleadings before or at the trial (H3) Exec. Gov. of Osun State v. Folorunsho (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2497 CA

 

COURTS - Proceedings - Due process - It is the duty of court to set standard precedents - Not only to arrest circumstances before it - But to compel people to always follow due process of law (H8) Enterprise Bank Ltd. v. Amao (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2595 CA

 

COURTS - Proceedings - Rules - Court does not operate in vacuum - It operates within the ambit of the enabling laws and rules (H2) Exec. Gov. of Osun State v. Folorunsho (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2497 CA

 

COURTS - Shall - Interpretation of - The word commands mandatoriness - Except in few cases where court in doing substantial justice - Interpreted shall as permissive (H8) Seplat Petro. Dev. v. Brittania-U Nig. Ltd. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2643 CA

 

COURTS - Torts - Libel - Test - Is that of a reasonable man - And Judge will be guided by how reasonable men of ordinary intelligence - Would likely understand the words used in their ordinary meaning (H10) Enterprise Bank Ltd. v. Amao (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2595 CA

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Alibi - Particulars - Proof - Accused who raises the defence - Must give particulars of his whereabouts at the time the offence was committed - So as to assist police in their investigation (H5) Iduwe v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2615 CA

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Alibi - Plea of - Validity - Exhibits A & C having fixed appellant at the crime scene - His plea was rightly rejected - Since where there is direct participation in a crime - The plea is negated (H6) Iduwe v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2615 CA

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Confession - Cautionary words - Effect - The words as used in opening page of a confession - Do not necessarily render such statement inadmissible (H3) Iduwe v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2615 CA

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Confession - Exhibits A & C are in the nature of confessional statements - Since a critical perusal of the statements - Reveals a comprehensive flow of a narration (H1) Iduwe v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2615 CA

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Confession - Validity - Since the exhibits went through trial within trial - Exhibits A & C were properly admitted and relied upon - In convicting appellant (H4) Iduwe v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2615 CA

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Murder - Proof - Corroboration - Evidence of PW3 is unequivocal as to the cause of the death - And it corroborates appellant’s extrajudicial statements (H7) Iduwe v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2615 CA

 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Unchallenged evidence - Weight - Where evidence is led by party - And there is no contrary evidence from the other party - The evidence is deemed to be true and accepted (H2) Iduwe v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2615 CA

 

CUSTOMARY LAW - Appeals - Jurisdiction - CA is barred from entertaining appeal from Customary Court of Appeal - Except same rests on issues of Customary Law (H2) Okorie v. Chukwu (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 305 CA

 

DAMAGES - Actions - Contract - Breach - In action for breach hinged on dishonoured cheque - Claimant is entitled to award of nominal damages - Unless he pleads specific damages suffered (H7) Citibank Nig. Ltd. v. Ikediashi (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 273 CA

 

DAMAGES - Banking - Cheque - Libelous endorsement - Reliefs - Where such exists in addition to dishonour of cheque - Customer can in the same action - Claim for damages for breach of contract and for libel (H6) Citibank Nig. Ltd. v. Ikediashi (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 273 CA

 

DAMAGES - Banking - Cheque - Payment of - Denial of customer’s cheque - When he has to his credit an amount endorsed therein - Is a breach of contract for which banker is liable in damages (H2) Citibank Nig. Ltd. v. Ikediashi (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 273 CA

 

DAMAGES - Contracts - Breach - Libel - Award - Although it is elegant to separate the amount awarded for damages for breach and for libel - But no miscarriage of justice resulted from the non separation (H8) Citibank Nig. Ltd. v. Ikediashi (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 273 CA

 

DAMAGES - General damages - Award - It is at discretion of trial court - And appellate court will not interfere - Unless inter alia trial court acted under mistake of law - And in disregard of principles (H9) Citibank Nig. Ltd. v. Ikediashi (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 273 CA

 

DEFAMATION - Banking - Qualified privilege - Defence - Due notice not given to respondent prior to closure of his account - It follows that the publication - Which constitutes libel cannot justify the defence (H13) Citibank Nig. Ltd. v. Ikediashi (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 273 CA

 

DEFAMATION - Defence - Qualified privilege - It is occasioned when the person who makes the writing has moral duty to make same - And the person who receives it has an interest in hearing it (H12) Citibank Nig. Ltd. v. Ikediashi (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 273 CA

 

DEFAMATION - Justification - Failure to prove - Appellant failed to justify the statements made in exhibit N8 - And therefore cannot succeed on plea of justification (H13) Enterprise Bank Ltd. v. Amao (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2595 CA

 

DEFAMATION - Publication - Meaning - It means making known of the defamatory matter - After it has been written to some people - Other than the person of whom it is written (H2) Enterprise Bank Ltd. v. Amao (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2595 CA

 

DEFAMATION - Torts - Defamation - Meaning of - Sketch’s case - Defamatory statement is one which is published concerning a person - And calculated to lower him in the estimation of right thinking persons (H9) Enterprise Bank Ltd. v. Amao (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2595 CA

 

DOCUMENTS - Torts - Libel - Publication - Reference - It is not in all circumstances that names of persons - To whom alleged libelous document is delivered - Can be numerically mentioned (H4) Enterprise Bank Ltd. v. Amao (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2595 CA

 

EVIDENCE - Actions - Contract - Breach - Damages - In action for breach hinged on dishonoured cheque - Claimant is entitled to award of nominal damages - Unless he pleads specific damages suffered (H7) Citibank Nig. Ltd. v. Ikediashi (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 273 CA

 

EVIDENCE - Actions - Limitation law - Purpose - It is to protect defendant from injustice of facing a stale claim - In view of the likelihood that evidence which was earlier available - May have faded (H5) Exec. Gov. of Osun State v. Folorunsho (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2497 CA

 

EVIDENCE - Admissibility - Confession - Cautionary words - Effect - The words as used in opening page of a confession - Do not necessarily render such statement inadmissible (H3) Iduwe v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2615 CA

 

EVIDENCE - Alibi - Particulars - Proof - Accused who raises the defence - Must give particulars of his whereabouts at the time the offence was committed - So as to assist police in their investigation (H5) Iduwe v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2615 CA

 

EVIDENCE - Alibi - Plea of - Validity - Exhibits A & C having fixed appellant at the crime scene - His plea was rightly rejected - Since where there is direct participation in a crime - The plea is negated (H6) Iduwe v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2615 CA

 

EVIDENCE - Banking - Account - Notice of closure - Notice was not justifiably given to respondent - As he can only be deemed to have received notice via registered post - Upon the signing or collection from post office (H3) Citibank Nig. Ltd. v. Ikediashi (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 273 CA

 

EVIDENCE - Confession - Exhibits A & C are in the nature of confessional statements - Since a critical perusal of the statements - Reveals a comprehensive flow of a narration (H1) Iduwe v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2615 CA

 

EVIDENCE - Confession - Validity - Since the exhibits went through trial within trial - Exhibits A & C were properly admitted and relied upon - In convicting appellant (H4) Iduwe v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2615 CA

 

EVIDENCE - Contracts - Binding contract - Evidence of payments for the goods ordered and supplied - Are proof of a binding commercial transaction - And justify the finding in debt by the trial Judge (H2) New Age Beverage Co. Ltd. v. Aramide (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 163 CA

 

EVIDENCE - Contracts - Fact in issue - There is no misdirection in the matter - As evidence by appellant’s witness was considered as admission of fact in issue - And not an issue of onus of proof (H3) New Age Beverage Co. Ltd. v. Aramide (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 163 CA

 

EVIDENCE - Courts - Issue - Determination - It is not the duty of court to speculate on any matter - But to determine a case based on evidence before it (H7) Enterprise Bank Ltd. v. Amao (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2595 CA

 

EVIDENCE - Crime - Unchallenged evidence - Weight - Where evidence is led by party - And there is no contrary evidence from the other party - The evidence is deemed to be true and accepted (H2) Iduwe v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2615 CA

 

EVIDENCE - Evaluation - Trial court ascribes credibility to evidence of witnesses - And where findings of facts are not perverse - Appellate court cannot interfere with them (H6) Enterprise Bank Ltd. v. Amao (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2595 CA

 

EVIDENCE - Fraud - Allegation of - Proof - Party making such allegation has the duty to prove particulars of same - But appellant failed to prove fact contained in Exhibit N8 - Alleging that respondent was involved in fraud (H11) Enterprise Bank Ltd. v. Amao (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2595 CA

 

EVIDENCE - Libel - Ingredients - Proof - Plaintiff must prove that there is the publication complained of - That the same refers to him - And is defamatory to him (H3) Enterprise Bank Ltd. v. Amao (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2595 CA

 

EVIDENCE - Murder - Proof - Corroboration - Evidence of PW3 is unequivocal as to the cause of the death - And it corroborates appellant’s extrajudicial statements (H7) Iduwe v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2615 CA

 

EVIDENCE - Torts - Defamation - Justification - Failure to prove - Appellant failed to justify the statements made in exhibit N8 - And therefore cannot succeed on plea of justification (H13) Enterprise Bank Ltd. v. Amao (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2595 CA

 

EVIDENCE - Torts - Libel - Proof - In action for libel it is the duty of defendant and not plaintiff to prove - That the main charge of the libel is true (H12) Enterprise Bank Ltd. v. Amao (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2595 CA

 

EVIDENCE - Torts - Libel - Publication - Reference - It is not in all circumstances that names of persons - To whom alleged libelous document is delivered - Can be numerically mentioned (H4) Enterprise Bank Ltd. v. Amao (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2595 CA

 

FAIR HEARING - Breach - Allegation of - Fairness is expected from both sides - Hence appellants cannot complain of denial of fair hearing - Having not been fair to the court and respondent (H10) Exec. Gov. of Osun State v. Folorunsho (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2497 CA

 

FAIR HEARING - Orders of court - Certiorari - Conditions for - The relief is available where there is lack or excess of jurisdiction - Error on the face of record - And breach of fair hearing (H3) Okorie v. Chukwu (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 305 CA

 

FRAUD - Allegation of - Proof - Party making such allegation has the duty to prove particulars of same - But appellant failed to prove fact contained in Exhibit N8 - Alleging that respondent was involved in fraud (H11) Enterprise Bank Ltd. v. Amao (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2595 CA

 

JUDGMENTS - Courts - Issue - Determination - It is not the duty of court to speculate on any matter - But to determine a case based on evidence before it (H7) Enterprise Bank Ltd. v. Amao (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2595 CA

 

JUDGMENTS - Orders of court - Non suit - Condition for - It is made where it appears on the record that plaintiff’s case has not wholly failed - And that in any case defendant would not be entitled to judgment (H1) Nwakalor v. Kalambe (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 921 CA

 

JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS - Torts - Defamation - Meaning of - Sketch’s case - Defamatory statement is one which is published concerning a person - And calculated to lower him in the estimation of right thinking persons (H9) Enterprise Bank Ltd. v. Amao (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2595 CA

 

JURISDICTION - Absence of - Orders of court - Court must have jurisdiction before making a preservative order - Hence trial court erred by considering the application - When there is objection to its jurisdiction (H5) Seplat Petro. Dev. v. Brittania-U Nig. Ltd. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2643 CA

 

JURISDICTION - Appeals - Court of Appeal - Jurisdiction - CA is barred from entertaining appeal from Customary Court of Appeal - Except same rests on issues of Customary Law (H2) Okorie v. Chukwu (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 305 CA

 

JURISDICTION - Appeals - Record - Where not complete - Appellate court cannot hear an appeal with incomplete records - As such incomplete record affects the competence of the court (H3) Seplat Petro. Dev. v. Brittania-U Nig. Ltd. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2643 CA

 

JURISDICTION - Determination - Court has jurisdiction to determine - Whether it has jurisdiction to hear a case (H6) Exec. Gov. of Osun State v. Folorunsho (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2497 CA

 

JURISDICTION - Fundamentality of - It is a threshold issue that can be raised at any stage even for first time on appeal - And absence of same renders the entire proceeding a nullity (H4) Seplat Petro. Dev. v. Brittania-U Nig. Ltd. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2643 CA

 

JURISDICTION - Orders of court - Certiorari - Conditions for - The relief is available where there is lack or excess of jurisdiction - Error on the face of record - And breach of fair hearing (H3) Okorie v. Chukwu (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 305 CA

 

JUSTICE - Adjournment - Grant - Discretion lies with trial court - Which must exercise same judicially and judiciously - Deciding on competing issues of justice and of speedy determination of the issues (H9) Exec. Gov. of Osun State v. Folorunsho (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2497 CA

 

JUSTICE - Contracts - Breach - Libel - Damages - Award - Although it is elegant to separate the amount awarded for damages for breach and for libel - But no miscarriage of justice resulted from the non separation (H8) Citibank Nig. Ltd. v. Ikediashi (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 273 CA

 

JUSTICE - Shall - Interpretation of - The word commands mandatoriness - Except in few cases where court in doing substantial justice - Interpreted shall as permissive (H8) Seplat Petro. Dev. v. Brittania-U Nig. Ltd. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2643 CA

 

LIBEL - Banking - Cheque - Libelous endorsement - Reliefs - Where such exists in addition to dishonour of cheque - Customer can in the same action - Claim for damages for breach of contract and for libel (H6) Citibank Nig. Ltd. v. Ikediashi (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 273 CA

 

LIBEL - Contracts - Breach - Libel - Damages - Award - Although it is elegant to separate the amount awarded for damages for breach and for libel - But no miscarriage of justice resulted from the non separation (H8) Citibank Nig. Ltd. v. Ikediashi (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 273 CA

 

LIBEL - Ingredients - Proof - Plaintiff must prove that there is the publication complained of - That the same refers to him - And is defamatory to him (H3) Enterprise Bank Ltd. v. Amao (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2595 CA

 

LIBEL - Parties - Three parties are involved in libel - The publisher - Person defamed by the publication - And person the publication is delivered to (H5) Enterprise Bank Ltd. v. Amao (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2595 CA

 

LIBEL - Publication - Reference - It is not in all circumstances that names of persons - To whom alleged libelous document is delivered - Can be numerically mentioned (H4) Enterprise Bank Ltd. v. Amao (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2595 CA

 

LIBEL - Test - Is that of a reasonable man - And Judge will be guided by how reasonable men of ordinary intelligence - Would likely understand the words used in their ordinary meaning (H10) Enterprise Bank Ltd. v. Amao (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2595 CA

 

MASTER & SERVANT - Statutes - Limitation law - Being a civil servant in Osun State - Trial court rightly held that it is the State’s law and not the Federal enactment - That applies to employment of respondent (H8) Exec. Gov. of Osun State v. Folorunsho (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2497 CA

 

MOTIONS - Orders of court - Discharge - Application for - Propriety - Application of 27/12/13 to discharge order made on 23/12/13 is within time - And valid to invoke provisions of FHC Rules O. 27 r. 12 (H6) Seplat Petro. Dev. v. Brittania-U Nig. Ltd. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2643 CA

 

MURDER - Proof - Corroboration - Evidence of PW3 is unequivocal as to the cause of the death - And it corroborates appellant’s extrajudicial statements (H7) Iduwe v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2615 CA

 

OBJECTIONS - Appeals - Respondent’s notice - Appellant seeking to oppose the notice must file preliminary objection - And he is not allowed to raise the objection in his brief (H9) Seplat Petro. Dev. v. Brittania-U Nig. Ltd. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2643 CA

 

OBJECTIONS - Courts - Preliminary objection - Determination of - The trial court has discretion by O. 22 r. 2 of its Rules - To entertain any point of law raised in pleadings before or at the trial (H3) Exec. Gov. of Osun State v. Folorunsho (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2497 CA

 

OBJECTIONS - Jurisdiction - Absence of - Court must have jurisdiction before making a preservative order - Hence trial court erred by considering the application - When there is objection to its jurisdiction (H5) Seplat Petro. Dev. v. Brittania-U Nig. Ltd. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2643 CA

 

OBJECTIONS - Preliminary objection - Limitation law - Pleadings - Substance of the objection is a special defence - Which must be pleaded specifically by party - Before relying on same (H4) Exec. Gov. of Osun State v. Folorunsho (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2497 CA

 

OBJECTIONS - Preliminary objection - Purpose - The objective is to terminate a case at the preliminary stage - So that only issues that are free from known legal handicap go to trial (H1) Exec. Gov. of Osun State v. Folorunsho (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2497 CA

 

ORDERS OF COURT - Certiorari - Conditions for - The relief is available where there is lack or excess of jurisdiction - Error on the face of record - And breach of fair hearing (H3) Okorie v. Chukwu (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 305 CA

 

ORDERS OF COURT - Discharge - Application for - Propriety - Application of 27/12/13 to discharge order made on 23/12/13 is within time - And valid to invoke provisions of FHC Rules O. 27 r. 12 (H6) Seplat Petro. Dev. v. Brittania-U Nig. Ltd. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2643 CA

 

ORDERS OF COURT - Ex parte order - Discharge - O. 26 rr. 11 & 12 - Ex parte order of injunction should not last more than 14 days - Upon application by affected party to have it discharged or varied (H7) Seplat Petro. Dev. v. Brittania-U Nig. Ltd. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2643 CA

 

ORDERS OF COURT - Jurisdiction - Absence of - Court must have jurisdiction before making a preservative order - Hence trial court erred by considering the application - When there is objection to its jurisdiction (H5) Seplat Petro. Dev. v. Brittania-U Nig. Ltd. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2643 CA

 

ORDERS OF COURT - Non suit - Address of parties - Before the order can be made - Court must call on parties to address it on the propriety of making same - As failure to do so sets aside the order (H3) Nwakalor v. Kalambe (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 921 CA

 

ORDERS OF COURT - Non suit - Applicable laws - Before the order can be made by court - The Act establishing the court or rules governing its procedure - Must provide for the order (H2) Nwakalor v. Kalambe (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 921 CA

 

ORDERS OF COURT - Non suit - Condition for - It is made where it appears on the record that plaintiff’s case has not wholly failed - And that in any case defendant would not be entitled to judgment (H1) Nwakalor v. Kalambe (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 921 CA

 

PARTIES - Appeals - Record - Verification of - Parties to an appeal are required to appear to settle record - And where a party declines to attend - He should not turn around to challenge the compilation (H2) Seplat Petro. Dev. v. Brittania-U Nig. Ltd. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2643 CA

 

PARTIES - Contract - Binding nature - Parties to written contract are mutually bound by terms therein - And court has duty to enforce same - Provided that they are not illegal or contrary to public policy (H5) Citibank Nig. Ltd. v. Ikediashi (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 273 CA

 

PARTIES - Costs - Award - Principles - Successful party is entitled to cost unless circumstances deprive him of same - But costs are not awarded as punitive measure against the losing party (H10) Citibank Nig. Ltd. v. Ikediashi (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 273 CA

 

PARTIES - Court processes - Abuse - Characteristics - It shows itself in the institution of multiple actions on the same subject matter - Against the same parties (H1) Okorie v. Chukwu (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 305 CA

 

PARTIES - Evidence - Crime - Unchallenged evidence - Weight - Where evidence is led by party - And there is no contrary evidence from the other party - The evidence is deemed to be true and accepted (H2) Iduwe v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2615 CA

 

PARTIES - Fair hearing - Breach - Allegation of - Fairness is expected from both sides - Hence appellants cannot complain of denial of fair hearing - Having not been fair to the court and respondent (H10) Exec. Gov. of Osun State v. Folorunsho (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2497 CA

 

PARTIES - Fraud - Allegation of - Proof - Party making such allegation has the duty to prove particulars of same - But appellant failed to prove fact contained in Exhibit N8 - Alleging that respondent was involved in fraud (H11) Enterprise Bank Ltd. v. Amao (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2595 CA

 

PARTIES - Objections - Preliminary objection - Limitation law - Pleadings - Substance of the objection is a special defence - Which must be pleaded specifically by party - Before relying on same (H4) Exec. Gov. of Osun State v. Folorunsho (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2497 CA

 

PARTIES - Orders of court - Ex parte order - Discharge - O. 26 rr. 11 & 12 - Ex parte order of injunction should not last more than 14 days - Upon application by affected party to have it discharged or varied (H7) Seplat Petro. Dev. v. Brittania-U Nig. Ltd. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2643 CA

 

PARTIES - Orders of court - Non suit - Address of parties - Before the order can be made - Court must call on parties to address it on the propriety of making same - As failure to do so sets aside the order (H3) Nwakalor v. Kalambe (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 921 CA

 

PARTIES - Torts - Libel - Parties - Three parties are involved in libel - The publisher - Person defamed by the publication - And person the publication is delivered to (H5) Enterprise Bank Ltd. v. Amao (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2595 CA

 

PLEADINGS - Courts - Preliminary objection - Determination of - The trial court has discretion by O. 22 r. 2 of its Rules - To entertain any point of law raised in pleadings before or at the trial (H3) Exec. Gov. of Osun State v. Folorunsho (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2497 CA

 

PLEADINGS - Objections - Preliminary objection - Limitation law - Pleadings - Substance of the objection is a special defence - Which must be pleaded specifically by party - Before relying on same (H4) Exec. Gov. of Osun State v. Folorunsho (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2497 CA

 

POLICE - Alibi - Particulars - Proof - Accused who raises the defence - Must give particulars of his whereabouts at the time the offence was committed - So as to assist police in their investigation (H5) Iduwe v. State (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2615 CA

 

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE - Appeals - Record - Compilation of - CA Rules O. 8 r. 1 - Duty is on Registrar of HC to compile record - But appellant is only required to do so after expiration of 60 days - And if the Registrar failed to act (H1) Seplat Petro. Dev. v. Brittania-U Nig. Ltd. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2643 CA

 

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE - Contracts - Fact in issue - There is no misdirection in the matter - As evidence by appellant’s witness was considered as admission of fact in issue - And not an issue of onus of proof (H3) New Age Beverage Co. Ltd. v. Aramide (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 163 CA

 

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE - Costs - Award - Principles - Successful party is entitled to cost unless circumstances deprive him of same - But costs are not awarded as punitive measure against the losing party (H10) Citibank Nig. Ltd. v. Ikediashi (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 273 CA

 

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE - Courts - Preliminary objection - Determination of - The trial court has discretion by O. 22 r. 2 of its Rules - To entertain any point of law raised in pleadings before or at the trial (H3) Exec. Gov. of Osun State v. Folorunsho (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2497 CA

 

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE - Courts - Proceedings - Due process - It is the duty of court to set standard precedents - Not only to arrest circumstances before it - But to compel people to always follow due process of law (H8) Enterprise Bank Ltd. v. Amao (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2595 CA

 

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE - Courts - Proceedings - Rules - Court does not operate in vacuum - It operates within the ambit of the enabling laws and rules (H2) Exec. Gov. of Osun State v. Folorunsho (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2497 CA

 

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE - Jurisdiction - Fundamentality of - It is a threshold issue that can be raised at any stage even for first time on appeal - And absence of same renders the entire proceeding a nullity (H4) Seplat Petro. Dev. v. Brittania-U Nig. Ltd. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2643 CA

 

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE - Orders of court - Non suit - Address of parties - Before the order can be made - Court must call on parties to address it on the propriety of making same - As failure to do so sets aside the order (H3) Nwakalor v. Kalambe (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 921 CA

 

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE - Orders of court - Non suit - Applicable laws - Before the order can be made by court - The Act establishing the court or rules governing its procedure - Must provide for the order (H2) Nwakalor v. Kalambe (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 921 CA

 

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE - Orders of court - Non suit - Condition for - It is made where it appears on the record that plaintiff’s case has not wholly failed - And that in any case defendant would not be entitled to judgment (H1) Nwakalor v. Kalambe (2015) 3 KLR (pt. 360) 921 CA

 

REGISTERED MAILS - Banking - Account - Notice of closure - Notice was not justifiably given to respondent - As he can only be deemed to have received notice via registered post - Upon the signing or collection from post office (H3) Citibank Nig. Ltd. v. Ikediashi (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 273 CA

 

RULES OF COURT - Appeals - Record - Compilation of - CA Rules O. 8 r. 1 - Duty is on Registrar of HC to compile record - But appellant is only required to do so after expiration of 60 days - And if the Registrar failed to act (H1) Seplat Petro. Dev. v. Brittania-U Nig. Ltd. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2643 CA

 

RULES OF COURT - Courts - Preliminary objection - Determination of - The trial court has discretion by O. 22 r. 2 of its Rules - To entertain any point of law raised in pleadings before or at the trial (H3) Exec. Gov. of Osun State v. Folorunsho (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2497 CA

 

RULES OF COURT - Orders of court - Discharge - Application for - Propriety - Application of 27/12/13 to discharge order made on 23/12/13 is within time - And valid to invoke provisions of FHC Rules O. 27 r. 12 (H6) Seplat Petro. Dev. v. Brittania-U Nig. Ltd. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2643 CA

 

RULES OF COURT - Orders of court - Ex parte order - Discharge - O. 26 rr. 11 & 12 - Ex parte order of injunction should not last more than 14 days - Upon application by affected party to have it discharged or varied (H7) Seplat Petro. Dev. v. Brittania-U Nig. Ltd. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2643 CA

 

RULES OF COURT - Shall - Interpretation of - The word commands mandatoriness - Except in few cases where court in doing substantial justice - Interpreted shall as permissive (H8) Seplat Petro. Dev. v. Brittania-U Nig. Ltd. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2643 CA

 

SALE OF GOODS - Contracts - Binding contract - Evidence of payments for the goods ordered and supplied - Are proof of a binding commercial transaction - And justify the finding in debt by the trial Judge (H2) New Age Beverage Co. Ltd. v. Aramide (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 356) 163 CA

 

STATUTES - Actions - Limitation law - Being a civil servant in Osun State - Trial court rightly held that it is the State’s law and not the Federal enactment - That applies to employment of respondent (H8) Exec. Gov. of Osun State v. Folorunsho (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 368) 2497 CA

 

TORTS - Banking - Defamation - Qualified privilege - Defence - Due notice not given to respondent prior to closure of his account - It follows that the publication - Which constitutes libel cannot justify the defence (H13) Citibank Nig. Ltd. v. Ikediashi (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 273 CA

 

TORTS - Contracts - Breach - Libel - Damages - Award - Although it is elegant to separate the amount awarded for damages for breach and for libel - But no miscarriage of justice resulted from the non separation (H8) Citibank Nig. Ltd. v. Ikediashi (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 273 CA

 

TORTS - Defamation - Defence - Qualified privilege - It is occasioned when the person who makes the writing has moral duty to make same - And the person who receives it has an interest in hearing it (H12) Citibank Nig. Ltd. v. Ikediashi (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 273 CA

 

TORTS - Defamation - Justification - Failure to prove - Appellant failed to justify the statements made in exhibit N8 - And therefore cannot succeed on plea of justification (H13) Enterprise Bank Ltd. v. Amao (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2595 CA

 

TORTS - Defamation - Meaning of - Sketch’s case - Defamatory statement is one which is published concerning a person - And calculated to lower him in the estimation of right thinking persons (H9) Enterprise Bank Ltd. v. Amao (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2595 CA

 

TORTS - Defamation - Publication - Meaning - It means making known of the defamatory matter - After it has been written to some people - Other than the person of whom it is written (H2) Enterprise Bank Ltd. v. Amao (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2595 CA

 

TORTS - Libel - Banking - Cheque - Libelous endorsement - Reliefs - Where such exists in addition to dishonour of cheque - Customer can in the same action - Claim for damages for breach of contract and for libel (H6) Citibank Nig. Ltd. v. Ikediashi (2015) 1 KLR (pt. 357) 273 CA

 

TORTS - Libel - Ingredients - Proof - Plaintiff must prove that there is the publication complained of - That the same refers to him - And is defamatory to him (H3) Enterprise Bank Ltd. v. Amao (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2595 CA

 

TORTS - Libel - Parties - Three parties are involved in libel - The publisher - Person defamed by the publication - And person the publication is delivered to (H5) Enterprise Bank Ltd. v. Amao (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2595 CA

 

TORTS - Libel - Proof - In action for libel it is the duty of defendant and not plaintiff to prove - That the main charge of the libel is true (H12) Enterprise Bank Ltd. v. Amao (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2595 CA

 

TORTS - Libel - Publication - Reference - It is not in all circumstances that names of persons - To whom alleged libelous document is delivered - Can be numerically mentioned (H4) Enterprise Bank Ltd. v. Amao (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2595 CA

 

TORTS - Libel - Test - Is that of a reasonable man - And Judge will be guided by how reasonable men of ordinary intelligence - Would likely understand the words used in their ordinary meaning (H10) Enterprise Bank Ltd. v. Amao (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2595 CA

 

WORDS & PHRASES - Shall - Interpretation of - The word commands mandatoriness - Except in few cases where court in doing substantial justice - Interpreted shall as permissive (H8) Seplat Petro. Dev. v. Brittania-U Nig. Ltd. (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2643 CA

 

WORDS & PHRASES - Torts - Defamation - Meaning of - Sketch’s case - Defamatory statement is one which is published concerning a person - And calculated to lower him in the estimation of right thinking persons (H9) Enterprise Bank Ltd. v. Amao (2015) 7 KLR (pt. 369) 2595 CA