ACTIONS - Abandonment of - Appellants cannot be said to have abandoned the suit by failing to file statement of claim - For they rightly pursued their appeal to SC since lower courts ruled against their motion (H4) Allanah v. Kpolokwu (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 279; (2016) 6 NWLR (PT.1507) 1

ACTIONS - Bona fide claim of right - Condition - For a claim to qualify as bona fide claim of right - Such claim must be made in good faith - And without fraud or deceit (H3) Spies v. Oni (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 388) 3113; (2016) 14 NWLR (PT.1532) 236

ACTIONS - Bona fide claim of right - Proof - Respondent having been found to be in possession - Is presumed to hold a better title - As appellant failed to establish his claim of right (H4) Spies v. Oni (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 388) 3113; (2016) 14 NWLR (PT.1532) 236

ACTIONS - Cause of action - Determination - Basis - In order to determine when a cause of action accrued - The processes to be considered are writ of summons and statement of claim (H10) Okafor v. Bende Div. Union (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 393) 4687; (2017) 5 NWLR (PT.1559) 385

ACTIONS - Cause of action - Meaning of - It is the facts which gave rise to right to sue - The right of which consists of the wrongful act of defendant - That gave plaintiff right to complain (H8) Okafor v. Bende Div. Union (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 393) 4687; (2017) 5 NWLR (PT.1559) 385

ACTIONS - Cause of action - Time - Cause of action in the matter arose between 1985 and 1986 - When 1^st respondent was alerted that the property has been sold to appellant (H9) Okafor v. Bende Div. Union (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 393) 4687; (2017) 5 NWLR (PT.1559) 385

ACTIONS - Commencement - Originating summons - As there is no dispute on the relevant facts in the matter - Originating summons was properly used to institute the suit at the FHC (H8) Oguebego v.

PDP (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 921; (2016) 4 NWLR (PT.1503) 446

ACTIONS - Commencement - Validity - No matter how malicious an action may be - As long as it is lawful and constitutional - It cannot be held to be an abuse of court process (H7) Alafia v. Gbode Ven. Nig. Ltd. (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 243; (2016) 7 NWLR (PT.1510) 116

ACTIONS - Consistency of - Appellant's case is clearly based on membership of 1^st respondent - He cannot therefore make out a case different from that he set up to do at trial Court (H7) Agi v. PDP (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 392) 4291

ACTIONS - Contracts - Breach - Locus standi - Respondent having demonstrated sufficient locus cannot be referred to as stranger - Hence it can seek for redress for breach of contract against appellant (H3) B.B. Apugo&S. Ltd. v. Orthopaedic H. M. B. (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 388) 2931; (2016) 13 NWLR (PT.1529) 206

ACTIONS - Contracts - Privity of - For action in contract to be sustained - There must be privity of contract - Hence appellant relying on relief in equity without substance - Cannot set up a cause of action against respondent (H2) Reichie v. NBCI (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 380) 1253; (2016) 8 NWLR (PT.1514) 294

ACTIONS - Counter claim - Party - Defendant in an action can counter claim against plaintiff or codefendants - Depending on his cause of action and the reliefs he seeks (H8) Esuwoye v. Bosere (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 390) 3639; (2017) 1 NWLR (PT.1546) 256

ACTIONS - Counter claim - Statute barred - The counter claim is not statute barred - Having not been instituted outside the 3 months provided by Public Officers Protection Law s. 2 (H5) Esuwoye v. Bosere (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 390) 3639; (2017) 1 NWLR (PT.1546) 256

ACTIONS - Court - Jurisdiction - Once a matter is not properly constituted - The court lacks the jurisdiction to entertain it (H1) Alafia v. Gbode Ven. Nig. Ltd. (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 243; (2016) 7 NWLR (PT.1510) 116

ACTIONS - Courts - Competence of - Conditions - Court is competent when inter alia it is properly constituted - Subject matter is within its jurisdiction - And action is initiated by due process of law (H1) Diamond Bank Ltd. v. Ugochukwu (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 382) 1525; (2016) 9 NWLR (PT.1517) 193

ACTIONS - Courts - Reliefs - Grant of - Basis - Entitlement to reliefs from court is if on the basis of the facts adduced - The court thinks that grant of the reliefs is just (H4) Ezechukwu v. Onwuka (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 855; (2016) 5 NWLR (PT.1506) 529

ACTIONS - Crime - Proof - Where commission of crime by a party is directly in issue - It must be proved beyond reasonable doubt - And the burden of proof is on the person who asserts it (H15) Nyesom v. Peterside (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 380) 1181; (2016) 7 NWLR (PT.1512) 452

ACTIONS - Declaratory relief - Basis for grant - Plaintiff must satisfy Court by credible evidence - That he is entitled to the right he claims - As the relief is not granted even on admission of defendant (H3) GE Int. Operations Nig. Ltd. v. Q. Oil & Gas Services Ltd. (2016) 3 KLR (pt. 383) 2093; (2016) 10 NWLR (PT.1520) 304

ACTIONS - Declaratory reliefs - Proof - Where a party seeks declaratory reliefs - The burden is on him to succeed on the strength of his case - And not on weakness of defence (H17) Nyesom v. Peterside (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 380) 1181; (2016) 7 NWLR (PT.1512) 452

ACTIONS - Hearing notice - Service of - Court must satisfy itself of service of the notice - Before it proceeds with hearing and judgment - Otherwise the proceeding no matter how well conducted is a nullity (H1) Achuzia v. Ogbomah (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 380) 1023; (2016) 11 NWLR (PT.1522) 59

ACTIONS - Issues - Competence of - Locus standi to institute action does not mean that the action is competent - As its competence depends on issues raised - Reliefs sought - And the applicable laws (H14) Faleke v. INEC (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 391) 4109; (2016) 18 NWLR

(PT.1543) 61

ACTIONS - Judgments - Party - No person is to be adversely affected by judgment in an action - Of which he was not a party to (H4) Oguebego v. PDP (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 921; (2016) 4 NWLR (PT.1503) 446

ACTIONS - Judgments - Where court has finally settled matter in dispute - Neither party nor privy may relitigate same issue under the guise of fresh action - As the matter is said to be res judicata (H1) Cole v. Jibunoh (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 378) 531; (2016) 4 NWLR (PT.1503) 499

ACTIONS - Jurisdiction - Federal High Court - Federal Government agency - Where such agency is party to a case - The court is possessed with jurisdiction to hear and determine the case (H3) Ekagbara v. Ikpeazu (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 378) 565; (2016) 4 NWLR (PT.1503) 411

ACTIONS - Land law - Title - Proof - In an action for declaration of title - Plaintiff has to succeed on the strength of his case - And not on the weakness of the defence (H3) Faleye v. Dada (2016) 4 KLR (pt. 385) 2479; (2016) 15 NWLR (PT.1534) 80

ACTIONS - Limitation law - Effect of - Is that legal proceedings cannot be validity instituted - After the expiration of the prescribed period (H11) Okafor v. Bende Div. Union (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 393) 4687; (2017) 5 NWLR (PT.1559) 385

ACTIONS - Locus standi - Determination - It is plaintiff's pleadings that is considered by court - To determine whether he has locus to institute an action (H6) Nyesom v. Peterside (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 380) 1181; (2016) 7 NWLR (PT.1512) 452

ACTIONS - Locus standi - Meaning - It is the legal capacity of a party to institute action in court - And a plaintiff assuming locus must have sufficient interest in the suit (H1) B.B. Apugo & S. Ltd. v. Orthopaedic H. M. B. (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 388) 2931; (2016) 13 NWLR (PT.1529) 206

ACTIONS - Locus standi - Where plaintiff lacks the locus to maintain his action - No issue in the case can be gone into - As the court is denied of jurisdiction to determine the action (H3) Okwu v. Umeh (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 989; (2016) 4 NWLR (PT.1501) 120

ACTIONS - Multiplicity of suit - Abuse of process - Appellant's act of filing present suit on the same relief as in a previous suit - Amounts to an abuse of process (H4) Mabamije v. Otto (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 379; (2016) 13 NWLR (Pt.1529) 171

ACTIONS - Multiplicity of suits - Different parties - Where parties in multiplied suits are not the same - There cannot be said to be an abuse of court process (H5) Oguebego v. PDP (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 921; (2016) 4 NWLR (PT.1503) 446

ACTIONS - Necessary party - Meaning of - Necessary party is one who is not only interested in subject matter of proceedings - But also one in whose absence the proceedings could not be fairly dealt with (H11) Faleke v. INEC (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 391) 4109; (2016) 18 NWLR (PT.1543) 61

ACTIONS - Notice of discontinuance - Estoppel - Appellant by filing the notice has waived her rights to claim same relief on same facts in present suit - She is thus estopped from relitigating (H5) Mabamije v. Otto (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 379; (2016) 13 NWLR (Pt.1529) 171

ACTIONS - Parties - Joinder of - Application - Unnamed parties seeking to join proceedings - Must bring application in the existing proceeding - And duly serve all the parties (H2) Apeh v. PDP (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 378) 509; (2016) 7 NWLR (PT.1510) 153

ACTIONS - Party - Necessary party - As the suit centres on the authentic National Leaders of APGA - It is a must that the political party be made a necessary party - For effectual determination of the suit (H1) Okwu v. Umeh (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 989; (2016) 4 NWLR (PT.1501) 120

ACTIONS - Party - Non joinder of - Although no cause shall be de

feated by reason of non joinder - Yet absence of necessary party - Appears to be exercise in futility for court to make a decision (H2) Okwu v. Umeh (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 989; (2016) 4 NWLR (PT.1501) 120

ACTIONS - Pleadings - Defect in - Effect - Pleading is the foundation of a claim - And once it is defective - The claim is bound to collapse (H4) Alhassan v. Ishaku (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 381) 1279; (2016) 10 NWLR (PT.1520) 230

ACTIONS - Proof - Declaration of right - Appellant seeking declaratory reliefs must establish his case by his pleadings and evidence led in support - On a preponderance of evidence (H15) Faleke v. INEC (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 391) 4109; (2016) 18 NWLR (PT.1543) 61

ACTIONS - Relief - Rules of court - Stating the rules by which parties assert their relief is technical - As once remedy is properly claimed - The same cannot be denied merely because the rule was wrongly stated (H4) Thomas v. Fed. J.S.C. (2016) 4 KLR (pt. 385) 2549(2016) 11 NWLR (PT.1523) 312

ACTIONS - Representative action - Existence of common interest is basis for such action - Hence the suit having been discontinued - 2nd appellant alone cannot maintain the action in a representative capacity (H4) Okwu v. Umeh (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 989; (2016) 4 NWLR (PT.1501) 120

ACTIONS - Representative suit - Application - Persons suing or defending in a representative capacity - Must have common interest in the proceeding - Otherwise court will not grant the application (H3) Apeh v. PDP (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 378) 509; (2016) 7 NWLR (PT.1510) 153

ACTIONS - Striking out - Reenlistment - Appellant whose case was struck out - Can reapply to same Court - To have the case reenlisted - Provided he satisfies Court to exercise discretion in his favour (H2) PDP v. Asadu (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 392) 4553; (2016) 17 NWLR (PT.1541) 215

ACTIONS - Substantive suit - Objection - Determination - Failure of trial Judge to consider the preliminary objection before the substantive suit - Occasioned a miscarriage of justice (H8) Garba v. Mohammed (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 388) 2989; (2016) 16 NWLR (PT.1537) 114

ACTIONS - Withdrawal of - Is not subject to debate - 1^st respondent having withdrawn its appeal - Has no right of audience before Court any more - And without any brief of argument - Counsel has nothing to urge the Court (H4) Agi v. PDP (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 392) 4291

ADJOURNMENTS - Appeals - Fresh issue - Additional authority - It is wrong for appellant in the guise of submitting additional authorities - To have advanced further argument - After appeal has been adjourned for judgment (H2) Brittania-U Nig. Ltd. v. Seplat Pet. Dev. Co. Ltd. (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 789; (2016) 4 NWLR (PT.1503) 541

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW - Appeals - Record - Transmission of - CA Rule O. 8 r. 1 - Registrar of court below has duty to compile and transmit its record to CA - Within 60 days after the filing of notice of appeal (H4) Brittania-U Nig. Ltd. v. Seplat Pet. Dev. Co. Ltd. (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 789; (2016) 4 NWLR (PT.1503) 541

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW - Documents - Public document - Certified true copy - Document can only be called CTC - If in addition to payment of legal fees - It is dated and subscribed to - By officer with his name and official title (H7) Emmanuel v. Umana (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 382) 1631

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW - Elections - INEC - Powers - Limit - Notwithstanding Electoral Act s. 153 empowering INEC to issue guidelines for election - INEC is not authorized to amend provisions of the Act (H3) Emerhor v. Okowa (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 382) 1587; (2016) 11 NWLR (PT.1522) 1

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW - Election - Results - Cancellation of - State Returning Officer has no power to cancel election - Thus 1^st respondent could not have been returned as winner - On the basis of such invalid cancellation (H8) Ikpeazu v. Otti (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 381) 1377;

(2016) 8 NWLR (PT.1513) 38

AFFIDAVITS - Appeals - Evaluation - Where conflict still exists in affidavit after a resolution by calling for oral evidence - CA as well as SC is qualified to further appraise the affidavit (H2) Ezechukwu v. Onwuka (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 855; (2016) 5 NWLR (PT.1506) 529

AFFIDAVITS - Appeals - Leave - Extension of time - The application is refused as the depositions in the affidavit are misleading - And the proposed grounds of appeal do not show any cogent and arguable issues (H1) Itsueli v. Sec. & Exch. Commission (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 376) 87; (2016) 6 NWLR (PT.1507) 160

AFFIDAVITS - Appeals - Record - Challenge - Procedure - The appropriate manner to impeach the contents of record of appeal - Is by affidavit evidence (H6) Brittania-U Nig. Ltd. v. Seplat Pet. Dev. Co. Ltd. (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 789; (2016) 4 NWLR (PT.1503) 541

AFFIDAVITS - Averments - Validity - Where facts deposed to in affidavit have not been controverted - Such facts would be deemed unchallenged and undisputed (H2) Mabamije v. Otto (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 379; (2016) 13 NWLR (Pt.1529) 171

AFFIDAVITS - Conflict - Resolution - As there is no conflict to what bailiff deposed to - Issue of calling for oral evidence to resolve conflicts did not arise (H3) Mgbenwelu v. Olumba (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 391) 4255; (2017) 5 NWLR (PT.1558) 169

AFFIDAVITS - Conflicts - Resolution - Where there are conflicts in affidavit on material issue - Court is expected to invite parties and call for oral evidence - To resolve the conflict (H3) Mabamije v. Otto (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 379; (2016) 13 NWLR (Pt.1529) 171

AFFIDAVITS - Conflicts - Resolution of - Where conflicts exist in deposition of parties - Court must resolve same by calling for oral evidence - Either from the deponent or other witnesses (H1) Ezechukwu v. Onwuka (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 855; (2016) 5 NWLR (PT.1506) 529

AFFIDAVITS - Courts - Summary judgment - Validity of - Court of Appeal rightly agreed that the summary judgment was proper - Since trial Judge found that appellant's affidavit were bereft of material evidence (H3) Lewis v. UBA Plc. (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 359; (2016) 6 NWLR (PT.1508) 329

AGREEMENTS - Pleadings - Oral evidence is not allowed for transaction reduced to writing - And once the writings are specifically pleaded as conveyance - It has to be registered to be allowed to be pleaded (H1) Chitra K. & W. Manu. Co. Ltd. v. Akingbade (2016) 5 KLR (pt. 386) 2637; (2016) 14 NWLR (PT.1533) 487

ALIBI - Armed robbery - Defence - The defence is not available to appellant - As respondent adduced sufficient evidence to fix appellant at the robbery scene at the material time (H4) Adewunmi v. State (2016) 3 KLR (pt. 384) 2273; (2016) 10 NWLR (PT.1521) 614

ALIBI - Defence - Condition - Accused must raise the defence at the earliest opportunity - To enable the police investigate it - But appellant failed to do so - Thereby making his alibi an afterthought (H6) Smart v. State (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 378) 651; (2016) 9 NWLR (PT.1518) 447

ALIBI - Defence - Condition - Accused must raise the defence at the earliest possible opportunity - Giving particulars of his whereabouts at the crime time - So that police can conduct their investigation (H4) Godsgift v. State (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 387) 2797; (2016) 13 NWLR (PT.1530) 444

ALIBI - Defence - Condition - Plea of alibi must be unequivocal - As appellant must state the time, place and people with him at the material time - To enable the police verify same (H2) Lucky v. State (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 387) 2849; (2016) 13 NWLR (PT.1528) 128

ALIBI - Defence - Conditions - Accused must raise alibi at earliest opportunity - Giving particulars of his whereabouts and those with him - As this will enable police to investigate the defence (H3) Adebiyi v. State (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 376) 13; (2016) 8 NWLR (PT.1515) 459

ALIBI - Defence - Conditions - Accused must raise the defence at earliest opportunity - To afford prosecution opportunity to investigate same - Otherwise the defence would be rejected (H4) Udo v. State (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 382) 1971; (2016) 12 NWLR (PT.1525) 1

ALIBI - Defence - Conditions - Accused must raise the defence timeously - Stating his whereabouts and those with him - So as to enable police conduct investigation (H4) Ogogovie v. State (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 387) 2887; (2016) 12 NWLR (PT.1527) 468

ALIBI - Defence - Failure to investigate - As appellant's defence of alibi was not investigated - He is entitled to an acquittal and not the conviction handed on him by trial court (H6) Osuagwu v. State (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 389) 3437; (2016) 16 NWLR (PT.1537) 31

ALIBI - Defence - From evidence on circumstances of appellant's arrest - And his failure to raise the defence promptly - Appellant cannot be availed by the defence of alibi (H4) Okiemute v. State (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 389) 3401; (2016) 15 NWLR (PT.1535) 297

ALIBI - Defence - Investigation - As respondent failed to investigate the alibi - Appellant must be discharged and acquitted - For his responsibility for the crime has not been proved beyond reasonable doubt (H4) Adebiyi v. State (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 376) 13; (2016) 8 NWLR (PT.1515) 459

ALIBI - Defence - Proof - Failure of appellant to give details of his whereabouts - And his inability to raise the defence at earliest opportunity - Renders the defence ineffective (H2) Ehimiyein v. State (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 390) 3593; (2016) 16 NWLR (PT.1538) 173

ALIBI - Defence - Proof - The defence does not avail appellant - As evidence of witnesses placed appellant at the crime scene - Hence police need not conduct any investigation (H3) Ezeuko v. State (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 380) 1057; (2016) 6 NWLR (PT.1509) 529

ALIBI - Defence - Rejection of - Where evidence called by prosecution against an alibi is credible and compelling - Court is entitled to

reject the defence of alibi (H7) Duru (Otokoto) v. State (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 392) 4373; (2017) 4 NWLR (PT.1554) 1

ALIBI - Defence - Weight - When properly established - The defence has far reaching effect of exculpating accused - From complete criminal responsibility (H2) Adebiyi v. State (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 376) 13; (2016) 8 NWLR (PT.1515) 459

ALIBI - Defence - Weight - Where prosecution has adduced sufficient evidence - To fix appellant at scene of crime - The defence becomes logically demolished (H3) Ehimiyein v. State (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 390) 3593; (2016) 16 NWLR (PT.1538) 173

ALIBI - Identification parade - Conduct of - It is not in every case that identification parade is necessary - As once there is direct evidence - Accused should call evidence to prove his alibi (H3) Adewunmi v. State (2016) 3 KLR (pt. 384) 2273; (2016) 10 NWLR (PT.1521) 614

ALIBI - Investigation - Failure to conduct - It is not a must that once investigation is not conducted - It becomes fatal to prosecution's case - As Court can still consider credibility of prosecution's evidence (H4) Ighalo v. State (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 389) 3311; (2016) 17 NWLR (PT.1540) 1

ALIBI - Investigation - Where accused raises alibi - He must give details of his whereabouts at earliest opportunity - Which will lead prosecution in their investigation (H6) Duru (Otokoto) v. State (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 392) 4373; (2017) 4 NWLR (PT.1554) 1

ALIBI - Investigation of - When unnecessary - In view of the overwhelming evidence - That specifically pinned appellant to the crime scene - Police is not mandated to investigate the alibi (H6) Godsgift v. State (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 387) 2797; (2016) 13 NWLR (PT.1530) 444

ALIBI - Plea of - Particulars - Accused must state his whereabouts and those present with him at the time of the incident - And duty is then shifted to prosecution to investigate and disprove same (H3) Ighalo

v. State (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 389) 3311; (2016) 17 NWLR (PT.1540) 1

ALIBI - Plea of - Weight - Courts rightly rejected appellant's defence - As same was not raised timeously - Hence the contention that the burden of proof was shifted to appellant is without substance (H8) Akindipe v. State (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 390) 3497; (2016) 15 NWLR (PT.1536) 470

APPEALS - Academic issues - Weight - Academic issues do not engage the attention of Courts - Since Courts are not the proper fora for such ventilation (H2) K.R.K Holdings Nig. Ltd v. FBN Ltd (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 392) 4449; (2017) 3 NWLR (PT.1552) 326

APPEALS - Affidavit - Evaluation - Where conflict still exists in affidavit after a resolution by calling for oral evidence - CA as well as SC is qualified to further appraise the affidavit (H2) Ezechukwu v. Onwuka (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 855; (2016) 5 NWLR (PT.1506) 529

APPEALS - Armed robbery - Identity of accused - Where there is positive identification of accused at the crime scene - Which is believed by trial court - Appellate court should not interfere (H4) Isong v. State (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 387) 2827; (2016) 14 NWLR (PT.1531) 96

APPEALS - Basis - Appeal being a challenge against decision of Court - Is never predicated on what Court did not decide in its judgment (H2) PDP v. Sylva (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 393) 4789; (2017) 5 NWLR (PT.1557) 74

APPEALS - Brief - Preliminary objection - Arguing brief inside preliminary objection is an irregularity - Which did not cause miscarriage of justice to appellant (H1) Osi v. Accord Party (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 393) 4767; (2017) 3 NWLR (PT.1553) 387

APPEALS - Brief - Quality of - Embarking on advancing argument on irrelevant and extraneous issues - Does not improve the quality of a party's brief of argument (H4) Okafor v. Abumofuani (2016) 4 KLR (pt. 385) 2517; (2016) 12 NWLR (PT.1525) 117

APPEALS - CA - Issues - Resolution of - The court being an intermediate court - Is admonished to pronounce on all issues arising in appeal before it - Even if the appeal has been disposed of by core issues (H4) Ikpeazu v. Otti (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 381) 1377; (2016) 8 NWLR (PT.1513) 38

APPEALS - Competence - Filing time - The appeal having been filed 25 days after judgment of CA was filed out of time - And as such the late filing renders it incompetent (H5) State(2) v. Omoyele (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 390) 3871; (2017) 1 NWLR (PT.1547) 341

APPEALS - Concept of - Appeal is continuation of original case commenced at trial Court - Hence it cannot be a new cause of action (H3) PDP v. Sylva (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 393) 4789; (2017) 5 NWLR (PT.1557) 74

APPEALS - Concurrent findings - Appellate court will not ordinarily interfere with findings made by trial court on credibility of witnesses - Unless it is shown that such findings are perverse (H1) Ayeni v. State (2016) 3 KLR (pt. 384) 2291; (2016) 12 NWLR (PT.1525) 51

APPEALS - Concurrent findings - Conviction - Appellant has not shown that the findings leading to his conviction - Did not evolve from evidence on record - As to warrant interference of SC (H3) Kpoobari v. FRN (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 376) 125; (2016) 13 NWLR (Pt.1528) 81

APPEALS - Concurrent findings - Interference - Supreme Court interferes only when the findings are perverse - Or arose upon wrong application of principles of law on established facts (H2) Okoh v. State (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 382) 1841; (2016) 10 NWLR (PT.1521) 455

APPEALS - Concurrent findings - Rescheduled election - Decisions that election held on 06/12/2015 was inconclusive - Haven been marred by serious irregularities - Are faultlessly unassailable (H3) Sylva v. INEC (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 393) 4815

APPEALS - Concurrent findings - SC will interfere where such find

ings are perverse - As a court's findings is perverse where it took into account - Certain matters which it ought not to have considered (H1) Adebiyi v. State (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 376) 13; (2016) 8 NWLR (PT.1515) 459

APPEALS - Consistency - Appeal is continuation of a trial - As there should be consistency in prosecuting a case - At trial court as well as in the appeal court (H1) Ladoja v. Ajimobi (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 382) 1691; (2016) 10 NWLR (PT.1519) 87

APPEALS - Contempt of - Committal order - Until committal order made by trial court is challenged and set aside by Court of Appeal - 2^nd respondent will remain a convict (H8) Alafia v. Gbode Ven. Nig. Ltd. (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 243; (2016) 7 NWLR (PT.1510) 116

APPEALS - Court - Findings - Failure to appeal - Appellants having failed to appeal against CA finding - That the land is communal land - Have no basis to deny at Supreme Court (H4) Salisu v. Mobolaji (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 390) 3793; (2016) 15 NWLR (PT.1535) 242

APPEALS - Court - Jurisdiction - Basis - Jurisdiction of appellate court enures when trial court is imbued with jurisdiction - And jurisdiction is so fundamental that it can be raised any time (H4) Adegbite v. Amosu (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 389) 3185; (2016) 15 NWLR (PT.1536) 405

APPEALS - Court of Appeal - Issues - Determination of - CA whose decision on issue of jurisdiction may be faulted by SC - Should not be debarred from pronouncing on other issues raised in appeal (H4) Alafia v. Gbode Ven. Nig. Ltd. (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 243; (2016) 7 NWLR (PT.1510) 116

APPEALS - Court processes - Abuse of - Common feature of abuse of process that centres on improper use of process by party - To interfere with justice - Is not applicable to facts of present appeal (H2) Allanah v. Kpolokwu (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 279; (2016) 6 NWLR (PT.1507) 1

APPEALS - Court's remark - Weight - Appellant's counsel erroneously interpreted the comment made by CA - As the same is an aside

and was not the basis of its judgment (H7) Lucky v. State (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 387) 2849; (2016) 13 NWLR (PT.1528) 128

APPEALS - Courts - Findings - Binding nature of - The fact that there is no appeal against finding of CA - Means that the finding remains valid and subsisting - And binding on the parties (H2) Chitra K. & W. Manu. Co. Ltd. v. Akingbade (2016) 5 KLR (pt. 386) 2637; (2016) 14 NWLR (PT.1533) 487

APPEALS - Courts - Findings - Failure to appeal - Finding of court that is not appealed against - Is deemed to have been accepted by the parties (H2) Isiaka v. Amosun (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 380) 1115; (2016) 9 NWLR (PT.1518) 417

APPEALS - Courts - High Courts - Coordinate jurisdiction - A court of coordinate jurisdiction cannot sit as appellate court in another case - To review a decision made by another court of the same hierarchy (H2) Cole v. Jibunoh (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 378) 531; (2016) 4 NWLR (PT.1503) 499

APPEALS - Courts - Issue - Failure to raise - Issue of illegality of the Minister's delegate to append signature having not been raised at trial - Will not be allowed on appeal - As doing so will overreach respondents (H4) Bullet Int. Nig. Ltd. v. Olaniyi (2016) 4 KLR (pt. 385) 2455; (2016) 10 NWLR (PT.1521) 580

APPEALS - Courts - Orders of - Jurisdiction - Where trial court lacks jurisdiction to entertain a matter - Or to make a particular order - Court of Appeal would equally lack jurisdiction to do so (H3) Egbuchu v. CMB Plc (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 381) 1337; (2016) 8 NWLR (PT.1513) 192

APPEALS - Criminal procedure - Brief of appeal - Additional grounds - May be filed and argued in a brief - But it must be regularized - Or be deemed incompetent as in this case (H1) Maraire v. State (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 392) 4467; (2017) 3 NWLR (PT.1552) 283

APPEALS - Criminal procedure - Language of Court - Appellant cannot be heard to complain of language used in trial - When such com

plaint was never raised from trial Court to SC (H10) Akwuobi v. State (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 391) 3979; (2017) 2 NWLR (PT.1550) 421

APPEALS - Discretion - Exercise of - Interference - Appellate court does not interfere - Save where the exercise of discretion was manifestly wrong (H4) Braithwaite v. Dalhatu (2016) 4 KLR (pt. 385) 2425; (2016) 13 NWLR (PT.1528) 32

APPEALS - Dismissal - Abuse of court process - By filing multiplicity of appeals on same subject matter - The appeal constitutes abuse of judicial process - And is liable to a dismissal (H3) Bukoye v. Adeyemo (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 390) 3565; (2017) 1 NWLR (PT.1546) 173

APPEALS - Election petitions - Brief - No of pages - The fact that appellant's brief comprises 41 pages instead of 40 as prescribed by the law - Is not enough to strike out the brief (H1) Emerhor v. Okowa (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 382) 1587; (2016) 11 NWLR (PT.1522) 1

APPEALS - Election petitions - Grounds - Allegation of non use of card reader did not arise from any specific ground - Attacking specific finding of the lower courts (H5) Waziri v. Geidam (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 382) 2007; (2016) 11 NWLR (PT.1523) 230

APPEALS - Election petitions - Right of appeal - By ordering INEC to issue certificate of return to 1^st respondent - Appellant's constitutional right of appeal was foreclosed (H7) Ikpeazu v. Otti (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 381) 1377; (2016) 8 NWLR (PT.1513) 38

APPEALS - Evidence - Evaluation - And ascription of probative value to evidence is duty of trial court - Which watched demeanour of witnesses - And appellate court would not ordinarily interfere (H16) Nyesom v. Peterside (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 380) 1181; (2016) 7 NWLR (PT.1512) 452

APPEALS - Evidence - Evaluation - Appraisal of evidence based on credibility of witness - Is the exclusive preserve of trial court - Which is out of range for appellate Court (H2) Faleye v. Dada (2016) 4 KLR (pt. 385) 2479; (2016) 15 NWLR (PT.1534) 80

APPEALS - Evidence - Evaluation - Where evaluation of evidence does not involve credibility of witness - Appellate Court is in position as trial Court - To do its own evaluation (H10) Esuwoye v. Bosere (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 390) 3639; (2017) 1 NWLR (PT.1546) 256

APPEALS - Evidence - Reevaluation of - Appellate Court does not evaluate evidence - But it can reevaluate evidence led at trial Court - Which is contained on the printed record (H9) Salisu v. Mobolaji (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 390) 3793; (2016) 15 NWLR (PT.1535) 242

APPEALS - Extension of time - Conditions - Court must be satisfied with applicant's explanation of failure to appeal within time - And the ground must show good cause why appeal should be heard (H1) Braithwaite v. Dalhatu (2016) 4 KLR (pt. 385) 2425; (2016) 13 NWLR (PT.1528) 32

APPEALS - Extension of time - Conditions - Exception - Court will not inquire about reason for delay - Where ground raises issue of lack of jurisdiction (H2) Braithwaite v. Dalhatu (2016) 4 KLR (pt. 385) 2425; (2016) 13 NWLR (PT.1528) 32

APPEALS - Filing - Additional grounds - Such grounds must not be filed within 21 days prescribed for filing notice of appeal - As it is within discretion of court - To grant leave to argue the grounds (H1) Isiaka v. Amosun (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 380) 1115; (2016) 9 NWLR (PT.1518) 417

APPEALS - Filing - Competence - Failure to comply with statutory requirement - Under which appeal may be properly brought before Court - Will deprive appellate Court of jurisdiction over the appeal (H3) Bello v. Damisa (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 391) 4067; (2017) 2 NWLR (PT.1550) 455

APPEALS - Filing - Endorsement - Although appeal is not filed unless fees are paid - Yet it is technical justice to strike out appeal - On mere fact that there is no endorsement relating to payment of fee (H2) GE Int. Operations Nig. Ltd. v. Q. Oil & Gas Services Ltd. (2016) 3 KLR (pt. 383) 2093; (2016) 10 NWLR (PT.1520) 304

APPEALS - Filing - Error - Sanction for non compliance with practice direction - In respect of transmission of records caused by officer in the court registry - Cannot be visited on innocent litigant (H1) Waziri v. Geidam (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 382) 2007; (2016) 11 NWLR (PT.1523) 230

APPEALS - Filing - Extension of time - Where there is failure to file appeal within period stipulated by the Rules - And extension of time was not obtained - Appellate Court has no jurisdiction over the appeal (H7) Allanah v. Kpolokwu (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 279; (2016) 6 NWLR (PT.1507) 1

APPEALS - Filing - Final decision - The order given by CA being a final one - SC Act s. 27(2)(a) guards the filing of notice of appeal - Thus appellant has three months within which to file the notice (H1) Nig. Agip Oil Co. Ltd. v. Nkweke (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 378) 591; (2016) 7 NWLR (PT.1512) 588

APPEALS - Filing - Multiple notices - Provided that each notice of appeal was filed within time - And appellant specifically chose particular notice to rely upon - There was no abuse of court process (H2) Garba v. Mohammed (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 388) 2989; (2016) 16 NWLR (PT.1537) 114

APPEALS - Filing - Rules of Court - Where there is no provision in rules of Federal High Court relating to appeals to Court of Appeal - Rules of Court of Appeal should be applied (H3) Nig. Agip Oil Co. Ltd. v. Nkweke (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 378) 591; (2016) 7 NWLR (PT.1512) 588

APPEALS - Filing - Stay of execution - Application for stay of execution pending determination of appeal - Presupposes that appeal had been filed - Or simultaneously with the application (H2) Nig. Agric. Coop. Bank Ltd. v. Ozoemelam (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 407; (2016) 9 NWLR (PT.1517) 376

APPEALS - Filing - Time frame - Judicial etc. Offices & Appeal by Prosecutors Act No. 10 limiting period of appeal to 7 days - Is aimed

at encouraging prosecutor to be up and doing (H6) State(2) v. Omoyele (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 390) 3871; (2017) 1 NWLR (PT.1547) 341

APPEALS - Filing fee - Proper venue - In respect of appeal which is as of right - Filing fee is payable at registry of High Court - But where leave is granted to file notice - Fee is payable at appeal court (H2) Nig. Agip Oil Co. Ltd. v. Nkweke (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 378) 591; (2016) 7 NWLR (PT.1512) 588

APPEALS - Finding - The finding of Court of Appeal rejecting exhibit D on the basis of wrongful admission - Cannot be faulted having regard to the record (H3) Onwuzuruike v. Edoziem (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 481; (2016) 6 NWLR (PT.1508) 215

APPEALS - Findings - Validity of - There is no basis for reversal of decision of CA - As there was sufficient material before the court - From which it made its findings and conclusions (H7) Faleye v. Dada (2016) 4 KLR (pt. 385) 2479; (2016) 15 NWLR (PT.1534) 80

APPEALS - Fresh evidence - Application must be brought to adduce further evidence on appeal - Appellant not having done this - The ground and issue formulated thereon cannot be competent (H1) Ikpeazu v. Otti (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 381) 1377; (2016) 8 NWLR (PT.1513) 38

APPEALS - Fresh issue - Additional authority - It is wrong for appellant in the guise of submitting additional authorities - To have advanced further argument - After appeal has been adjourned for judgment (H2) Brittania-U Nig. Ltd. v. Seplat Pet. Dev. Co. Ltd. (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 789; (2016) 4 NWLR (PT.1503) 541

APPEALS - Fresh issue - As the parties did not join issues - Issue being canvassed by appellant cannot be said to have been raised - And as such he cannot raise same on appeal (H3) Okafor v. Abumofuani (2016) 4 KLR (pt. 385) 2517; (2016) 12 NWLR (PT.1525) 117

APPEALS - Fresh issue - Leave - Sub issue of 1963 Constitutional provisions being fresh issue - Requires leave of Supreme Court - As it

was neither raised at trial nor before Court of Appeal (H6) Esuwoye v. Bosere (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 390) 3639; (2017) 1 NWLR (PT.1546) 256

APPEALS - Fresh issue - Raising of - Conditions - SC will allow fresh issue where inter alia - The issue involves substantial point of law - And all facts in support of the issue are before it (H3) Bullet Int. Nig. Ltd. v. Olaniyi (2016) 4 KLR (pt. 385) 2455; (2016) 10 NWLR (PT.1521) 580

APPEALS - Fundamental rights - Enforcement - Ex parte application - In the absence of respondents' processes - The necessary materials for the invocation of powers of appellate Courts are missing (H2) Benson v. COP (2016) 5 KLR (pt. 386) 2597; (2016) 12 NWLR (PT.1527) 445

APPEALS - Ground - Mixed law & facts - Leave - Failure of appellants to seek leave to file the ground renders it incompetent - And being the only ground - The appeal is also rendered incompetent (H6) Allanah v. Kpolokwu (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 279; (2016) 6 NWLR (PT.1507) 1

APPEALS - Ground of law - Issue estoppel - Complaint as to what constitutes issue estoppel - Is in the realm of legal principles - And consequently a ground of law (H1) Esuwoye v. Bosere (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 390) 3639; (2017) 1 NWLR (PT.1546) 256

APPEALS - Grounds - Basis - Grounds must relate to ratio decidendi of judgment - Or decision appealed against - And not against an obiter dictum (H3) K.R.K Holdings Nig. Ltd v. FBN Ltd (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 392) 4449; (2017) 3 NWLR (PT.1552) 326

APPEALS - Grounds - Challenge - It is duty of respondent who challenges classification of ground - To satisfy court that the ground belongs to a classification - Different from one assigned by appellant (H3) Brittania-U Nig. Ltd. v. Seplat Pet. Dev. Co. Ltd. (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 789; (2016) 4 NWLR (PT.1503) 541

APPEALS - Grounds - Classification of - To classify ground of law or

mixed law and facts - Court should examine the grounds and their particulars - And identify the substance of the appeal (H4) Umanah v. NDIC (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 389) 3465; (2016) 14 NWLR (PT.1533) 458

APPEALS - Grounds - Competence - Appeal is struck out where all grounds are incompetent - But one competent ground can save appeal - From being struck out (H1) GE Int. Operations Nig. Ltd. v. Q. Oil & Gas Services Ltd. (2016) 3 KLR (pt. 383) 2093; (2016) 10 NWLR (PT.1520) 304

APPEALS - Grounds - Competence of - Arguments on incompetent grounds - Cannot be lumped together with those of competent grounds - And courts do not sift the good grounds from bad ones (H12) Ikpeazu v. Otti (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 381) 1377; (2016) 8 NWLR (PT.1513) 38

APPEALS - Grounds - Competence of - Is not based on its allegation of both error in law and misdirection in fact per se - But on vagueness inter alia (H2) Eneh v. Ozor (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 390) 3619; (2016) 16 NWLR (PT.1538) 219

APPEALS - Grounds - Determination - In determining ground of appeal - It is vital to thoroughly examine both the ground and its particular (H4) State(2) v. Omoyele (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 390) 3871; (2017) 1 NWLR (PT.1547) 341

APPEALS - Grounds - Determination - In determining whether ground show good cause why appeal should be heard - Court must consider whether ground is substantial and reveals arguable ground (H3) Braithwaite v. Dalhatu (2016) 4 KLR (pt. 385) 2425; (2016) 13 NWLR (PT.1528) 32

APPEALS - Grounds - Determination - Principle - Court must give regard to the particulars and consider them together - So as to ascertain the category to which they fit into (H5) Allanah v. Kpolokwu (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 279; (2016) 6 NWLR (PT.1507) 1

APPEALS - Grounds - Distinction - Appellate court must always dis

tinguish nature of grounds - Because the nature of a ground determines - Whether or not appellant can appeal as of right (H3) State(2) v. Omoyele (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 390) 3871; (2017) 1 NWLR (PT.1547) 341

APPEALS - Grounds - Distinction - Grounds and their particulars are examined - As a ground is of law where issue of law based on proved facts is disclosed - But where disputed facts is disclosed - Then it is of mixed law and facts (H2) Obasi v. Mikson E. Ind. Ltd. (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 389) 3361; (2016) 16 NWLR (PT.1539) 335

APPEALS - Grounds - Drafting - Manner of - Provided that a ground misleads no one - Any defect in the form or elegance of how it is couched is immaterial (H2) Sylva v. INEC (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 393) 4815

APPEALS - Grounds - Filing - Mixed law and facts - Leave must be obtained before such grounds are filed - As failure to do so renders the grounds and issues arising therefrom incompetent (H6) Umanah v. NDIC (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 389) 3465; (2016) 14 NWLR (PT.1533) 458

APPEALS - Grounds - Issues - Appellants' argument that failure to expressly tie issues to grounds makes the issue incompetent cannot hold - As it is enough if the issues can be linked (H6) Alafia v. Gbode Ven. Nig. Ltd. (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 243; (2016) 7 NWLR (PT.1510) 116

APPEALS - Grounds - Issues - Validity - Where ground is incompetent - Issues formulated from such ground - Are liable to be struck out (H5) Umanah v. NDIC (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 389) 3465; (2016) 14 NWLR (PT.1533) 458

APPEALS - Grounds - Leave - Objection in relation to competence of ground 5 is sustained - As appellant failed to obtain leave to raise and argue an issue - Coming before Supreme Court for the first time (H2) Yahaya v. Dankwanbo (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 378) 721; (2016) 7 NWLR (PT.1511) 284

APPEALS - Grounds - Limit - A party on an appeal against decision of court - Must confine itself to the matter already adjudicated upon (H1) Reichie v. NBCI (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 380) 1253; (2016) 8 NWLR (PT.1514) 294

APPEALS - Grounds - Mixed law & facts - Leave - Where appellant appeals on such grounds - Leave must be sought and obtained - Otherwise the appeal is incompetent and Court will have no jurisdiction (H1) Nzei v. UNN (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 393) 4649; (2017) 6 NWLR (PT.1561) 300

APPEALS - Grounds - Mixed law and facts - Leave - Appeal on such grounds without leave of court - Is incompetent and will be struck out (H2) State(2) v. Omoyele (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 390) 3871; (2017) 1 NWLR (PT.1547)

341

APPEALS - Grounds - Particulars - Purpose of - They are specifications of error or misdirection - So as to make clear how the complaint is to be canvassed (H3) Ngere v. Okuruket "XIV" (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 393) 4597; (2017) 5 NWLR (PT.1559) 440

APPEALS - Grounds - Particulars - Supreme Court Rules O. 8 r. 2(2) requires that - Where grounds allege misdirection or error in law - Particulars and nature of the misdirection shall be clearly stated (H1) Ngere v. Okuruket "XIV" (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 393) 4597; (2017) 5 NWLR (PT.1559) 440

APPEALS - Grounds - Purpose of - Is to clearly indicate the areas of appellant's complaint - And appellant cannot argue grounds not related to the judgment appealed against (H3) Emmanuel v. Umana (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 382) 1631

APPEALS - Grounds - Purpose of - Is to isolate and accentuate for attack - The basis of the reasoning of the decision challenged (H1) Sylva v. INEC (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 393) 4815

APPEALS - Grounds - Purpose of - It is to give sufficient notice to respondent - About the precise nature of appellant's complaint against

a ratio decidendi not obiter of a judgment (H2) Ngere v. Okuruket "XIV" (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 393) 4597; (2017) 5 NWLR (PT.1559) 440

APPEALS - Grounds - Validity - Ground 6 and issue 6 predicated thereon is incompetent - As there is no application by appellant - Challenging the striking out of the name of the bank (H12) B.B. Apugo & S. Ltd. v. Orthopaedic H. M. B. (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 388) 2931; (2016) 13 NWLR (PT.1529) 206

APPEALS - Grounds - Validity - Grounds must lie from decision of CA to SC - Hence appellant's ground 2 that attacks acts of registry of CA - Instead of acts of any of the Justices is incompetent (H2) Ikpeazu v. Otti (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 381) 1377; (2016) 8 NWLR (PT.1513) 38

APPEALS - Grounds - Validity - Once a ground gives respondent the necessary notice of grudges - Appellant has against the decision on appeal - The ground is competent (H1) Ogboru v. Okowa (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 382) 1753; (2016) 11 NWLR (PT.1522) 84

APPEALS - Grounds - Validity - The present grounds and issues therein are direct attack on judgment of Court of Appeal - Hence they are competent (H5) FRN v. Nwosu (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 390) 3709; (2016) 17 NWLR (PT.1541) 226

APPEALS - Grounds - Validity - The whole decision of CA having been made subject to appeal - Substance of the grounds and their particulars have to be considered - Thus grounds 1 & 4 are valid (H1) Yahaya v. Dankwanbo (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 378) 721; (2016) 7 NWLR (PT.1511) 284

APPEALS - Grounds - Validity of - For ground to be competent - It must be related to the decision being appealed against - And should constitute a challenge to the ratio of the decision (H2) Okafor v. Abumofuani (2016) 4 KLR (pt. 385) 2517; (2016) 12 NWLR (PT.1525) 117

APPEALS - Grounds - Validity of - Grounds should be against ratio decidendi not against obiter - Ground 1 here not having violated this

principle is valid. (H1) Eneh v. Ozor (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 390) 3619; (2016) 16 NWLR (PT.1538) 219

APPEALS - Grounds of law - Validity - The grounds being complaint that rules of law were applied wrongly to established facts - Are grounds of law which can be raised without leave (H3) Obasi v. Mikson E. Ind. Ltd. (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 389) 3361; (2016) 16 NWLR (PT.1539) 335

APPEALS - Hearing - Condition - Appeal can only be heard on valid notice of appeal - Hence hearing of the appeal by CA on an abandoned notice - Amounted to a void act (H2) Abiodun v. FRN (2016) 3 KLR (pt. 384) 2229; (2016) 9 NWLR (PT.1516) 126

APPEALS - Hearing - Jurisdiction - Supreme Court lacks jurisdiction to hear appellant's complaints in issue 1 - As it relates to the decision of the trial Court (H3) Maraire v. State (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 392) 4467; (2017) 3 NWLR (PT.1552) 283

APPEALS - Interlocutory - Record - Transmission of - CA Practice Direction O. 8 r. 2 - Appellant and respondent jointly settle the record - And fix estimated cost for compilation and transmission of same (H5) Brittania-U Nig. Ltd. v. Seplat Pet. Dev. Co. Ltd. (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 789; (2016) 4 NWLR (PT.1503) 541

APPEALS - Interlocutory appeal - Filing time - SC Rules O. 7 rr. 6 & 7 - Appellants are to file their notice within 14 days - And as there is no evidence of their compliance - Objection on the point is sustained (H3) Allanah v. Kpolokwu (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 279; (2016) 6 NWLR (PT.1507) 1

APPEALS - Issue - Determination - Incidental order - Appellate court can make an order once same is incidental to issue in appeal - Even if same was not sought and parties have not been heard (H3) Tindafai v. Jara (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 376) 217; (2016) 8 NWLR (PT.1513) 19

APPEALS - Issue - Determination of - Court's omission to consider and resolve any of the issues agitating the appeal - In absence of any valid reason - Will be fatal to the court's judgment (H3) Okere v.

State (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 963

APPEALS - Issue - Determination of - Issue of malice was not raised suo motu and resolved without hearing the parties - As it was argued by parties and considered by the court (H2) Mainstreet Bank Ltd. v. Binna (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 381) 1433; (2016) 12 NWLR (PT.1526) 316

APPEALS - Issue - Formulation - Issue for determination must arise from grounds of appeal - But when it is not based on grounds of appeal filed - The issue is held to be irrelevant (H3) Nsirim v. Amadi (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 427; (2016) 5 NWLR (PT.1504) 42

APPEALS - Issue - Preference of - CA did not err when it preferred issues distilled by respondent to those of appellant - As this was done for sake of justice - By bringing out clearly the issue in dispute (H4) Okere v. State (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 963

APPEALS - Issue - Reframing of - Appellate court may reframe issue - Where it finds that the interest of justice is not served - But such issue must be derived from grounds of appeal filed by parties (H1) Okere v. State (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 963

APPEALS - Issue - Reframing of - Fair hearing - In reframing issues appellate court must secure fundamental basis of appellate system - And guarantee rights of parties to fair hearing under the Constitution (H2) Okere v. State (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 963

APPEALS - Issue - Reply brief - Issue raised by appellant in reply brief - Which respondent did not bother to respond to in court - Is not an issue raised suo motu (H8) Mabamije v. Otto (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 379; (2016) 13 NWLR (Pt.1529) 171

APPEALS - Issue - Validity - Issue of controversy as to which organ of 1^st respondent - Has power to conduct primaries as held by CA cannot stand - As that was not the main issue (H7) Oguebego v. PDP (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 921; (2016) 4 NWLR (PT.1503) 446

APPEALS - Issues - Accelerated hearing - The issues being weighty

must be settled in good time - As court does not encourage delays in proceedings between parties (H1) Barbedos Ven. Ltd. v. FBN Plc. (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 321; (2016) 11 NWLR (PT.1523) 301

APPEALS - Issues - Clarity of - Verbosity does not enhance quality of issues - As issues must be precise and devoid of ambiguity - For easy comprehension of matters for adjudication (H1) Governor Ekiti State v. Olubunmo (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 392) 4411; (2017) 3 NWLR (PT.1551) 1

APPEALS - Issues - Competence of - There is no need for deliberation on the issue of proper certification of INEC documents - As same was not part of ratio decidendi of the case (H4) Belgore v. Ahmed (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 391) 4009; (2013) 8 NWLR (PT.1355) 60

APPEALS - Issues - Determination - Appellant by his failure in CA to raise issue from grounds 1 & 2 - Has deprived the court of opportunity to pronounce on issue arising from the grounds (H1) Ezeuko v. State (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 380) 1057; (2016) 6 NWLR (PT.1509) 529

APPEALS - Issues - Determination - Appellate court must consider and resolve all issues formulated by parties - Provided those issues arose from competent grounds (H1) Okafor v. Abumofuani (2016) 4 KLR (pt. 385) 2517; (2016) 12 NWLR (PT.1525) 117

APPEALS - Issues - Determination - No miscarriage of justice was done to appellant - As his case was considered before CA concluded that - Trial court in its ruling went into the merits of the case (H1) Egharevba v. FRN (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 382) 1543; (2016) 10 NWLR (PT.1521) 431

APPEALS - Issues - Failure to challenge - Where a party fails to respond to an issue - He is deemed to have admitted all that his adversary has stated (H4) ADC v. Bello (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 391) 3937; (2017) 1 NWLR (PT.1545) 112

APPEALS - Issues - Formulation of - Single issue can be formulated from several grounds - But it is not proper to formulate more than one issue from single ground of appeal (H4) Okafor v. Bende Div.

Union (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 393) 4687; (2017) 5 NWLR (PT.1559) 385

APPEALS - Issues - Leave - Issue of non raising of application of section 15 of Court of Appeal Act before CA - Involves substantial points of law that needed determination - To avoid miscarriage of justice (H2) Esuwoye v. Bosere (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 390) 3639; (2017) 1 NWLR (PT.1546) 256

APPEALS - Issues - Reformulation of - Court can reformulate issues in order to bring out real questions for determination - And it can even adopt sole issue where it is determinative of the appeal (H2) Governor Ekiti State v. Olubunmo (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 392) 4411; (2017) 3 NWLR (PT.1551) 1

APPEALS - Issues - Reframing of - Where issues are clumsy - Court is entitled to reformulate issues - From the competent grounds of appealed filed by appellant (H1) Kayode v. State (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 380) 1139; (2016) 7 NWLR (PT.1511) 199

APPEALS - Issues - Resolution of the question of the Head of family against 3^rd respondent - Has no adverse effect on respondents' appeal at the Court of Appeal (H10) Alafia v. Gbode Ven. Nig. Ltd. (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 243; (2016) 7 NWLR (PT.1510) 116

APPEALS - Issues - Validity - As the entire proceedings leading to conviction of appellant is a nullity - Appellant's 2^nd issue has become academic (H2) Adewole v. State (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 391) 3965; (2017) 7 NWLR (PT.1564) 239

APPEALS - Issues for determination - Competence of - Issues that flow from valid grounds of appeal are competent (H3) Eneh v. Ozor (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 390) 3619; (2016) 16 NWLR (PT.1538) 219

APPEALS - Judgment - Mistake - It is not every error that results in an appeal being in favour of appellant - As the error must be substantial - And must have occasioned miscarriage of justice (H4) Kayode v. State (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 380) 1139; (2016) 7 NWLR (PT.1511) 199

APPEALS - Judgment - Role of respondent - Is to uphold and support judgment appealed against - And not to advance oral submission against same (H5) Agi v. PDP (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 392) 4291

APPEALS - Jurisdiction - Election petition - By virtue of 1999 Constitution s. 246(3) - Decision of CA is final in State House of Assembly election - And SC has no jurisdiction to entertain appeal on the same matter (H3) Osi v. Accord Party (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 393) 4767; (2017) 3 NWLR (PT.1553) 387

APPEALS - Jurisdiction - Issue - Raising of - Issue of jurisdiction is so fundamental - That it can be raised at any stage of the proceedings - And even for the first time on appeal to Supreme Court (H1) Nyesom v. Peterside (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 380) 1181; (2016) 7 NWLR (PT.1512) 452

APPEALS - Jurisdiction - Stay of execution - Where there is appeal from CA to SC - Both courts have concurrent jurisdiction in an application for stay of execution - Pending determination of the appeal (H1) Nig. Agric. Coop. Bank Ltd. v. Ozoemelam (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 407; (2016) 9 NWLR (PT.1517) 376

APPEALS - Jurisdiction - Where subject matter of appeal is within jurisdiction of appellate court - Its jurisdiction is not ousted because it lacks power to grant some of the reliefs claimed (H1) Garba v. Mohammed (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 388) 2989; (2016) 16 NWLR (PT.1537) 114

APPEALS - Leave - Extension of time - The application is refused as the depositions in the affidavit are misleading - And the proposed grounds of appeal do not show any cogent and arguable issues (H1) Itsueli v. Sec. & Exch. Commission (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 376) 87; (2016) 6 NWLR (PT.1507) 160

APPEALS - Motions - Competence of - Merit or otherwise of the application is different from its competence - And must draw from submission of parties for and against competence of the grounds (H5) Thomas v. Fed. J.S.C. (2016) 4 KLR (pt. 385) 2549(2016) 11 NWLR

(PT.1523) 312

APPEALS - Notice of - Filing - Notice of appeal is an initiating process - Which must be properly filed before there is a valid appeal - As an appeal is incompetent where notice is defective (H1) Abiodun v. FRN (2016) 3 KLR (pt. 384) 2229; (2016) 9 NWLR (PT.1516) 126

APPEALS - Notice of - Importance of - It is the structure on which all subsequent processes in appellate court derive their support - As no such process can stand without subsistence of a valid notice (H1) Apeh v. PDP (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 378) 509; (2016) 7 NWLR (PT.1510) 153

APPEALS - Notice of - It is the foundation upon which appeal is based - And where it is defective there shall be no proper valid and lawful appeal (H1) S.P.D.C. of Nig. Ltd. v. Sam Royal Nig. Ltd. (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 381) 1495; (2016) 8 NWLR (PT.1514) 318

APPEALS - Notice of - Legal practitioner - Signature - Appellants' notice of appeal is fundamentally defective - As the same was signed by person - Not recognized to practice law in Nigeria (H2) S.P.D.C. of Nig. Ltd. v. Sam Royal Nig. Ltd. (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 381) 1495; (2016) 8 NWLR (PT.1514) 318

APPEALS - Notice of - Validity - As the appeal is interlocutory - Respondent had 15 days after receipt of notice of appeal to serve respondent's notice - Otherwise it will be held incompetent (H6) Mabamije v. Otto (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 379; (2016) 13 NWLR (Pt.1529) 171

APPEALS - Notice of appeal - Importance of - It is document giving notice of intention to appeal - Filed with appellate Court and served on opposing party - And in absence of which no valid appeal is filed (H1) Okpe v. Fan Milk Plc (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 393) 4733; (2017) 2 NWLR (PT.1549) 282

APPEALS - Notice of appeal - Signing of - Notice shall be signed by appellant or legal practitioner of his choice - And it shall be signed by appellant in criminal appeals (H2) Okpe v. Fan Milk Plc (2016) 9-12

KLR (pt. 393) 4733; (2017) 2 NWLR (PT.1549) 282

APPEALS - Objection - Brief - Number of pages - Objection to the number of pages contained in brief of argument - Can never be an issue touching on competence of the appeal (H3) Garba v. Mohammed (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 388) 2989; (2016) 16 NWLR (PT.1537) 114

APPEALS - Objection - Condition - SC Rules O. 2 r. 9 - The objection having been made in writing and on notice - Has satisfied the requirement of the Rules - Although it was wrongly brought (H2) Thomas v. Fed. J.S.C. (2016) 4 KLR (pt. 385) 2549(2016) 11 NWLR (PT.1523) 312

APPEALS - Oral evidence - Evaluation - Appellate Court is in as much as a good position as trial Court - To evaluate documentary or oral evidence - Where the demeanour of the witness is not in issue (H4) Chitra K. & W. Manu. Co. Ltd. v. Akingbade (2016) 5 KLR (pt. 386) 2637; (2016) 14 NWLR (PT.1533) 487

APPEALS - Orders of court - Stay of execution - Application - In the absence of an appeal against the order of trial court - CA could not have entertained application for stay of execution pending appeal (H3) Nig. Agric. Coop. Bank Ltd. v. Ozoemelam (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 407; (2016) 9 NWLR (PT.1517) 376

APPEALS - Pleadings - Consistency of - Parties are bound by their pleadings - And as an appeal is not a new action - Appellant is not permitted to set up a case different from what he made out at trial (H2) Bullet Int. Nig. Ltd. v. Olaniyi (2016) 4 KLR (pt. 385) 2455; (2016) 10 NWLR (PT.1521) 580

APPEALS - Preliminary objection - Determination of - Where the objection is raised challenging competence of appeal - Court is to first of all consider and dispose of the objection (H1) State(2) v. Omoyele (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 390) 3871; (2017) 1 NWLR (PT.1547) 341

APPEALS - Preliminary objection - Failure to respond - Once Court is satisfied that appellant was given opportunity to react - But failed to

do so - The objection should be heard and ruling rendered (H1) Umanah v. NDIC (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 389) 3465; (2016) 14 NWLR (PT.1533) 458

APPEALS - Preliminary objection - Filing - Purpose of - Isah v. INEC - It is filed against hearing of the appeal - To convince Court that the appeal is fundamentally defective (H3) Umanah v. NDIC (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 389) 3465; (2016) 14 NWLR (PT.1533) 458

APPEALS - Preliminary objection - Incorporated in brief - Respondent can argue his preliminary objection in his brief - And appellant is expected to respond by filing reply brief (H2) Umanah v. NDIC (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 389) 3465; (2016) 14 NWLR (PT.1533) 458

APPEALS - Preliminary objection - Incorporated in brief - Validity - Failure to file formal notice of objection - Will not render the objection incompetent - As it may be included in respondent's brief (H1) Allanah v. Kpolokwu (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 279; (2016) 6 NWLR (PT.1507) 1

APPEALS - Preliminary objection - Purpose of - Preliminary objection is aimed at scuttling hearing of appeal - And as such must be determined as threshold matter (H1) Obasi v. Mikson E. Ind. Ltd. (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 389) 3361; (2016) 16 NWLR (PT.1539) 335

APPEALS - Preliminary objection - Purpose of - Supreme Court Rules O. 2 r. 9(1) allows respondent to file notice of preliminary objection - The purpose of which is to terminate appeal in limine (H3) Okafor v. Bende Div. Union (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 393) 4687; (2017) 5 NWLR (PT.1559) 385

APPEALS - Record - Binding nature of - Parties and court are bound by the record of appeal - Which is presumed correct - Unless the contrary is proved (H7) Brittania-U Nig. Ltd. v. Seplat Pet. Dev. Co. Ltd. (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 789; (2016) 4 NWLR (PT.1503) 541

APPEALS - Record - Challenge - Procedure - The appropriate manner to impeach the contents of record of appeal - Is by affidavit evidence (H6) Brittania-U Nig. Ltd. v. Seplat Pet. Dev. Co. Ltd. (2016) 1

KLR (pt. 379) 789; (2016) 4 NWLR (PT.1503) 541

APPEALS - Record - Transmission of - CA Rule O. 8 r. 1 - Registrar of court below has duty to compile and transmit its record to CA - Within 60 days after the filing of notice of appeal (H4) Brittania-U Nig. Ltd. v. Seplat Pet. Dev. Co. Ltd. (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 789; (2016) 4 NWLR (PT.1503) 541

APPEALS - Record of - Binding nature - Appellate Court is bound by record of appeal - Which is also binding on all parties and their counsel (H4) Musa2 v. State (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 392) 4527; (2017) 4 NWLR (PT.1555) 187

APPEALS - Record of - Respondent's contention that record of appeal is incomplete - For not having appellant's reply to the petition is a misconception - As the said reply is part of the record (H4) PDP v. Sylva (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 393) 4789; (2017) 5 NWLR (PT.1557) 74

APPEALS - Reliefs - Grant - Court of Appeal was right not to have gone beyond - Granting the relief of leave to enforce fundamental right - As sought by appellant (H3) Benson v. COP (2016) 5 KLR (pt. 386) 2597; (2016) 12 NWLR (PT.1527) 445

APPEALS - Remittal order - Powers of CA - Appeal was properly remitted by CA to the HC for hearing in its appellate jurisdiction - Despite the nullification of proceedings of Sharia CA on basis of lack of jurisdiction (H2) Salihu v. Wasiu (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 376) 201; (2016) 5 NWLR (PT.1506) 423

APPEALS - Remittal order - Powers of CA - Having found that Sharia CA lacked jurisdiction - CA was within its powers in remitting appeal to HC - For hearing on merits in its appellate jurisdiction (H1) Tindafai v. Jara (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 376) 217; (2016) 8 NWLR (PT.1513) 19

APPEALS - Remittal order - Powers of CA - The consequential order remitting appeal to appropriate court - For same to be determined on merit - Falls within the powers of Court of Appeal (H1) Dantani v. Garba (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 376) 31; (2016) 7 NWLR (PT.1510) 74

APPEALS - Remittal order - Powers of CA - The order remitting the matter to appropriate court for trial on the merits - Falls squarely within CA power as statutorily conferred (H1) Mamman v. Hajo (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 376) 153; (2016) 8 NWLR (PT.1515) 411

APPEALS - Reply brief - Appellant who fails to respond to new points in respondent's brief - Is deemed to concede the points - And the points must be new - Not being an answer to issue raised by appellant (H1) Brittania-U Nig. Ltd. v. Seplat Pet. Dev. Co. Ltd. (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 789; (2016) 4 NWLR (PT.1503) 541

APPEALS - Reply brief - Filing - It is filed only in response to new argument of respondent - And it deals with new issue of law - Which was not covered by appellant's brief (H1) Salihu v. Wasiu (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 376) 201; (2016) 5 NWLR (PT.1506) 423

APPEALS - Reply brief - Purpose - It is to address fresh points raised in respondent's brief - As it is not for appellant to raise fresh issues - Or to re argue the appeal (H1) Faleke v. INEC (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 391) 4109; (2016) 18 NWLR (PT.1543) 61

APPEALS - Reply brief - Purpose - Reply brief is meant to address fresh points raised in respondent's brief - And not to introduce fresh points (H1) Akindipe v. State (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 390) 3497; (2016) 15 NWLR (PT.1536) 470

APPEALS - Reply brief - Purpose of - It is limited to any new point arising from respondent's brief - And appellant is deemed to have conceded such new point - Where he fails to file a reply (H1) Godsgift v. State (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 387) 2797; (2016) 13 NWLR (PT.1530) 444

APPEALS - Respondent - Duty of - Role of respondent is to urge the correctness of judgment being appealed against - As he cannot urge any point against such judgment (H1) Dahiru v. APC (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 391) 4089; (2017) 4 NWLR (PT.1555) 218

APPEALS - Respondent - Role of - Duty of respondent is to defend

the judgment of the court below - Except where he disagrees with some aspects of it - In which case he is to file cross appeal (H1) Nsirim v. Amadi (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 427; (2016) 5 NWLR (PT.1504) 42

APPEALS - Respondent's notice - Filing - Where respondent is of the view that appellate court should vary decision of lower court - He has to file a respondent's notice to that effect (H2) Nsirim v. Amadi (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 427; (2016) 5 NWLR (PT.1504) 42

APPEALS - Retrial - Correctness of - Court of Appeal was right to have ordered a trial before another Judge - As doing so will guarantee a fair determination of issues in the matter (H6) Chitra K. & W. Manu. Co. Ltd. v. Akingbade (2016) 5 KLR (pt. 386) 2637; (2016) 14 NWLR (PT.1533) 487

APPEALS - Right - Death of 3^rd respondent did not extinguish rights of 1^st and 2^nd respondents - To maintain and prosecute their appeals (H5) Alafia v. Gbode Ven. Nig. Ltd. (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 243; (2016) 7 NWLR (PT.1510) 116

APPEALS - Right of - Appropriate party - Right of appeal as enshrined in the Constitution - Is exercisable only by party aggrieved with judgment of Court (H1) PDP v. Sylva (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 393) 4789; (2017) 5 NWLR (PT.1557) 74

APPEALS - Right of - Exercise of - Right of appeal are exercised according to law and procedure governing appeal - And litigant is not permitted to abuse process of Court - In exercise of such right (H1) Bukoye v. Adeyemo (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 390) 3565; (2017) 1 NWLR (PT.1546) 173

APPEALS - Right of - Is Constitutionally conferred - And except for ascertained fundamental noncompliance with the Rules - Supreme Court is duty bound to preserve the right (H11) FRN v. Nwosu (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 390) 3709; (2016) 17 NWLR (PT.1541) 226

APPEALS - Rights - Appellants cannot be said to have abandoned the suit by failing to file statement of claim - For they rightly pursued their appeal to SC since lower courts ruled against their motion (H4)

Allanah v. Kpolokwu (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 279; (2016) 6 NWLR (PT.1507) 1

APPEALS - Rights - Limit - Although the right is constitutional - Yet exercise of same must be within bounds and not at large - Hence appellant is not provided with unregulated procedure in filing appeal (H2) Ladoja v. Ajimobi (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 382) 1691; (2016) 10 NWLR (PT.1519) 87

APPEALS - Sentence - Binding nature of - Appellate court cannot disturb sentence imposed - Unless there is an appeal against the sentence (H9) Lucky v. State (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 387) 2849; (2016) 13 NWLR (PT.1528) 128

APPEALS - Supreme Court - Hearing of appeals - Power - The Court cannot review appeal that was heard on abandoned notice - As its power under SC Act s. 22 cannot override Constitution 1999 s. 233 (H3) Abiodun v. FRN (2016) 3 KLR (pt. 384) 2229; (2016) 9 NWLR (PT.1516) 126

APPEALS - Supreme Court - Jurisdiction - The Court has no jurisdiction to entertain appeals directly from Federal High Court (H3) Oguebego v. PDP (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 921; (2016) 4 NWLR (PT.1503) 446

APPEALS - Supreme Court - Powers - SC Act s. 22 - The provision cannot be applied - As main issue in appeal of appellant was determined by CA - Which issue is substantial enough to dispose of the appeals (H2) Egharevba v. FRN (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 382) 1543; (2016) 10 NWLR (PT.1521) 431

APPEALS - Technicality - Weight - The appeal is based on mere technicality - As appellant lost nothing by the deletion of "Establishment" from respondent's name (H6) Obasi v. Mikson E. Ind. Ltd. (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 389) 3361; (2016) 16 NWLR (PT.1539) 335

APPEALS - Transfer of - Powers of Sharia Court of Appeal - The Court can transfer appeal to HC - Where it is of the opinion that an appeal from Area Court - Should have properly been brought to HC

(H2) Tindafai v. Jara (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 376) 217; (2016) 8 NWLR (PT.1513) 19

APPEALS - Unchallenged decision - Effect - Appellant having failed to challenge the finding of the Court of Appeal - Cannot now be allowed to contest same (H1) K.R.K Holdings Nig. Ltd v. FBN Ltd (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 392) 4449; (2017) 3 NWLR (PT.1552) 326

ARMED ROBBERY - Alibi - Defence - The defence is not available to appellant - As respondent adduced sufficient evidence to fix appellant at the robbery scene at the material time (H4) Adewunmi v. State (2016) 3 KLR (pt. 384) 2273; (2016) 10 NWLR (PT.1521) 614

ARMED ROBBERY - Conspiracy - Proof - A meeting of minds of appellant and others is inferred - By their act of robbing the bank - Hence conspiracy is proved beyond reasonable doubt (H7) Smart v. State (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 378) 651; (2016) 9 NWLR (PT.1518) 447

ARMED ROBBERY - Conspiracy - Proof - Exhibit B constitutes ingredient of conspiracy - As it expresses common intention of appellant and others - To commit armed robbery (H1) John v. State (2016) 3 KLR (pt. 384) 2313; (2016) 11 NWLR (PT.1523) 191

ARMED ROBBERY - Conspiracy - Proof - From evidence adduced - It can be inferred that appellant and others agreed to commit the crime - As their presence at the crime scene is not a coincidence (H2) Friday(2) v. State (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 389) 3291; (2016) 16 NWLR (PT.1538) 242

ARMED ROBBERY - Conviction - Confession - Besides appellant's confession - His conviction is a cumulative result of the confession - And evidence of the victims of the crime (H3) John v. State (2016) 3 KLR (pt. 384) 2313; (2016) 11 NWLR (PT.1523) 191

ARMED ROBBERY - Conviction - Correctness of - Trial court was right to have found appellant guilty as charged - As respondent has established all ingredients of the offence beyond reasonable doubt (H3) Eyo v. State (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 376) 39; (2016) 7 NWLR

(PT.1510) 183

ARMED ROBBERY - Conviction - Death sentence - Having found that prosecution proved its case against appellant - The sentence of death is the only option for the trial court (H4) John v. State (2016) 3 KLR (pt. 384) 2313; (2016) 11 NWLR (PT.1523) 191

ARMED ROBBERY - Fair hearing - Breach of - Where party has been given opportunity of being heard - But refuses to enter his defence - He is deemed to have voluntarily abandoned his case (H2) Nwokocha v. A-G Imo State (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 381) 1457; (2016) 8 NWLR (PT.1513) 141

ARMED ROBBERY - Identification - Of appellant by victims - That were not shaken under cross examination - Cannot be discredited - By counsel's speculation on absence of electricity (H7) Akinrinlola v. State (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 389) 3239; (2016) 16 NWLR (PT.1537) 73

ARMED ROBBERY - Identification parade - Necessity of - As the crime occurred at night with victims having short encounter with the armed robbers - Identification parade was imperative (H5) Adebiyi v. State (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 376) 13; (2016) 8 NWLR (PT.1515) 459

ARMED ROBBERY - Identity of accused - Where there is positive identification of accused at the crime scene - Which is believed by trial court - Appellate court should not interfere (H4) Isong v. State (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 387) 2827; (2016) 14 NWLR (PT.1531) 96

ARMED ROBBERY - Ingredient - Proof - Once it is established that the offence took place - The ingredient of the offence to be proved is to show - That accused was the robber or one of the robbers (H5) Olanipekun v. State (2016) 5 KLR (pt. 386) 2683; (2016) 13 NWLR (PT.1528) 100

ARMED ROBBERY - Ingredients - Proof - For prosecution to succeed he must prove - That there was robbery - That accused was armed - And that accused participated in the robbery (H8) Smart v. State (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 378) 651; (2016) 9 NWLR (PT.1518) 447

ARMED ROBBERY - Ingredients - Proof - Prosecution is bound to prove that there was robbery - That appellant was armed at the time of the robbery - And that appellant participated in the crime (H2) John v. State (2016) 3 KLR (pt. 384) 2313; (2016) 11 NWLR (PT.1523) 191

ARMED ROBBERY - Ingredients - Proof - Prosecution must prove that there was robbery - That the robbery was armed robbery - And that accused was one of the robbers (H1) Ogogovie v. State (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 387) 2887; (2016) 12 NWLR (PT.1527) 468

ARMED ROBBERY - Ingredients - Proof - Prosecution must prove that there was robbery - That the robbery was armed robbery - And that accused was one of the armed robbers (H2) kpo v. State (2016) 3 KLR (pt. 383) 2119; (2016) 10 NWLR (PT.1521) 501

ARMED ROBBERY - Ingredients - Proof - Prosecution must prove that there was a robbery - That the robbery was armed robbery - And that accused person was one of the robbers (H2) Adewunmi v. State (2016) 3 KLR (pt. 384) 2273; (2016) 10 NWLR (PT.1521) 614

ARMED ROBBERY - Ingredients - Proof - Prosecution must prove that there was robbery - That the robbers were armed - And that accused was one of the robbers (H7) Akwuobi v. State (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 391) 3979; (2017) 2 NWLR (PT.1550) 421

ARMED ROBBERY - Ingredients - Proof - To secure conviction for the offence - Prosecution must prove that there was robbery - That the robbery was armed robbery - And that accused was the robber (H6) Kayode v. State (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 380) 1139; (2016) 7 NWLR (PT.1511) 199

ARMED ROBBERY - Meaning - Robbery is committed if violence is used on anyone to facilitate stealing - Or stealing added with violence (H1) State(1) (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 390) v. Ajayi 3839(2016) 14 NWLR (PT.1532) 196

ARMED ROBBERY - Proof - From the evidence of ammunition used

at the robbery operation - And confession of appellant - Respondent has proved its case of armed robbery against appellant (H8) Akwuobi v. State (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 391) 3979; (2017) 2 NWLR (PT.1550) 421

ARMED ROBBERY - Proof - Identification - Failure to call the housemaid is not fatal - As PW1 positively identified appellant as one of the robbers (H1) Friday(2) v. State (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 389) 3291; (2016) 16 NWLR (PT.1538) 242

ARMED ROBBERY - Proof - Ingredients - Prosecution is to prove beyond reasonable doubt - That there was robbery - That the robbery was armed robbery - And accused participated in same (H6) Ehimiyein v. State (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 390) 3593; (2016) 16 NWLR (PT.1538) 173

ARMED ROBBERY - Proof - Ingredients - Prosecution must prove that there was robbery - That the robbery was armed robbery - And that accused participated in the robbery (H2) Akindipe v. State (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 390) 3497; (2016) 15 NWLR (PT.1536) 470

ARMED ROBBERY - Proof - Ingredients - Prosecution must prove that there was robbery - That the robbers were armed - And that accused participated in the robbery (H3) Musa1 v. State (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 392) 4499; (2017) 5 NWLR (PT.1557) 43

ARMED ROBBERY - Proof - Means of - The offence can be established by evidence of eye witness - Confessional statements - Circumstantial evidence - And admission by conduct of accused (H2) Ogogovie v. State (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 387) 2887; (2016) 12 NWLR (PT.1527) 468

ARMED ROBBERY - Proof - Onus is on prosecution - To establish guilt of accused beyond reasonable doubt - By showing inter alia - That he was one of the armed robbers (H9) Akinrinlola v. State (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 389) 3239; (2016) 16 NWLR (PT.1537) 73

ARMED ROBBERY - Proof - Presumption of guilt - The toy gun used for the robbery having been found with appellant - It is presumed

that he was part of the robbery gang (H1) Friday(1) v. State (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 389) 3277; (2016) 16 NWLR (PT.1538) 205

ARMED ROBBERY - Proof - The offence was proved against appellant beyond reasonable doubt - By evidence of identification given by PWs3 & 4 - Which disproved the defence of alibi (H5) Ighalo v. State (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 389) 3311; (2016) 17 NWLR (PT.1540) 1

ARMED ROBBERY - Proof - Where there are several evidence - Including appellant's confession to the crime - Prosecution has proved it's cased beyond reasonable doubt (H10) Akinrinlola v. State (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 389) 3239; (2016) 16 NWLR (PT.1537) 73

ARMED ROBBERY - Proof of - Ingredients - Prosecution must establish ingredients of the offence beyond reasonable doubt - Otherwise there will not be guilty verdict from court (H1) Osuagwu v. State (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 389) 3437; (2016) 16 NWLR (PT.1537) 31

ARMED ROBBERY - Retrial order - Validity of - Due to the gravity of the offence - Length of time spent in prison custody by accused - May not necessarily deter court from ordering a retrial (H3) Bude v. State (2016) 5 KLR (pt. 386) 2617; (2016) 12 NWLR (PT.1525) 154

ARMED ROBBERY - Stolen item - Presumption of guilt - Contained in Evidence Act s. 167(a) is applicable - As appellant failed to give good explanations as to how he came into possession of the items (H3) Ogogovie v. State (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 387) 2887; (2016) 12 NWLR (PT.1527) 468

ARMED ROBBERY - Toy gun - Possession of - The gun having been found in appellant's possession - He is bound to prove the ownership of same (H4) Friday(2) v. State (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 389) 3291; (2016) 16 NWLR (PT.1538) 242

ARMED ROBBERY - Weapons - Tendering of - As there is sufficient evidence against appellant - Non tendering of weapons used in operation - Is not fatal to case of respondent (H2) Musa1 v. State (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 392) 4499; (2017) 5 NWLR (PT.1557) 43

BANKING - Jurisdiction - Ouster of - Edict No. 7 of 1985 ousted the jurisdiction of the court - Thus the freezing of respondent's account and subsequent transfer of the funds - Are not subject to litigation (H2) Diamond Bank Ltd. v. Ugochukwu (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 382) 1525; (2016) 9 NWLR (PT.1517) 193

BANKING - Loan agreement - Repayment of - Terms for repayment stated in Exhibit B still remain - Hence appellant cannot unilaterally opt out of the contract - And cannot be relieved of the obligation to repay the loan (H1) Lewis v. UBA Plc. (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 359; (2016) 6 NWLR (PT.1508) 329

CHARGES - Amendment - Fair hearing - Failure to read and explain any alteration in the charge to accused - And to take his plea thereto - Violates the principle of fair hearing - And renders trial a nullity (H1) Bude v. State (2016) 5 KLR (pt. 386) 2617; (2016) 12 NWLR (PT.1525) 154

CHARGES - Conspiracy & substantive charges - Where indictment contains both charges - It is ideal to deal with substantive charge first - And then proceed to see how conspiracy has been made out (H2) Kayode v. State (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 380) 1139; (2016) 7 NWLR (PT.1511) 199

CHARGES - Conviction - Confession - Accused can be convicted on his confession - In which he admitted the commission of the crime as charged (H3) Bouwor v. State (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 775; (2016) 4 NWLR (PT.1502) 295

CHARGES - Crime victim - Listing of - It is not the law that such victim cannot be named against accused - Unless he makes statement to police - Regarding commission of offence against him (H10) Ezeuko v. State (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 380) 1057; (2016) 6 NWLR (PT.1509) 529

CHARGES - Evidence - Discrepancy in - Failure to mention exhibit B in the charge is not fatal to prosecution's case - As appellant was properly identified as one of the robbers (H3) Friday(1) v. State (2016)

7 KLR (pt. 389) 3277; (2016) 16 NWLR (PT.1538) 205

CHARGES - Framing of - Leave - Trial Court has discretion to grant or refuse leave to frame charge - And where a party feels the discretion is wrongfully exercised - There is right to appeal on that (H1) Akwuobi v. State (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 391) 3979; (2017) 2 NWLR (PT.1550) 421

CHARGES - Guilty plea - Effect - Appellant's plea of guilty indicates that he understood the charges - Otherwise he would have objected when the charges were being read to him - And before his plea (H1) Kpoobari v. FRN (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 376) 125; (2016) 13 NWLR (Pt.1528) 81

CHARGES - Guilty plea - Tendering of evidence - Once accused pleads guilty - Prosecution can ask for leave to tender exhibits - After summarizing facts of the case - And then urge the Court to convict (H7) Baalo v. FRN (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 387) 2761; (2016) 13 NWLR (PT.1530) 400

CHARGES - Interpretation - Arraignment of appellant was properly done - As the charge was explained to him and he understood same - Since neither he nor his counsel raised a complaint (H1) Adewunmi v. State (2016) 3 KLR (pt. 384) 2273; (2016) 10 NWLR (PT.1521) 614

CHARGES - Murder - Ingredients - Proof - To sustain a charge of murder - Prosecution must prove death of deceased - That the death was caused by act of accused - And that the act was intentional (H2) Akpan v. State (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 380) 1043; (2016) 9 NWLR (PT.1516) 110

CHARGES - Narcotic drugs - Federal High Court and not Magistrate Court is vested with jurisdiction - To entertain the charge bordering on Indian Hemp against appellant (H2) Ochala v. FRN (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 445; (2016) 17 NWLR (Pt.1541) 169

CHARGES - Proof - Admission of guilt - Prove beyond reasonable doubt applies where charge is denied - But where there is admission

of guilt - Establishing the legal burden does not arise (H2) Kpoobari v. FRN (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 376) 125; (2016) 13 NWLR (Pt.1528) 81

CHARGES - Recording of - Omission to expressly record that charge was read over and explained to accused before his plea was taken - Does not render trial a nullity (H5) Okere v. State (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 963

CHARGES - Summary trial - Advantages of - Where accused is arraigned and he pleads guilty - Court can summarily convict him - Provided it is satisfied that accused understood the charge (H1) Baalo v. FRN (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 387) 2761; (2016) 13 NWLR (PT.1530) 400

CHARGES - Validity - From evidence adduced and circumstances of the case - Charging of appellant with conspiracy along with the substantive charge - Does not render the charge bad in law (H5) Okiemute v. State (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 389) 3401; (2016) 15 NWLR (PT.1535) 297

CHIEFTAINCY MATTERS - Action - Cause of action - Time of - Cause of action of cross respondents did not accrue in 1969/1970 when exhibit' J' was promulgated - But in 2010 (H4) Esuwoye v. Bosere (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 390) 3639; (2017) 1 NWLR (PT.1546) 256

CHIEFTAINCY MATTERS - Appointment - Challenge - Procedure - Aggrieved ruling house should seek redress from Governor - And if not yet satisfied - Action can be filed in Court to resolve the dispute (H5) A-G of Kwara State v. Adeyemo (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 389) 3209; (2017) 1 NWLR (PT.1546) 211

CHIEFTAINCY MATTERS - Chieftaincy declaration - Regulation of - Courts have power to set aside registered declaration - That does not correctly declare custom and tradition of the affected area (H14) Esuwoye v. Bosere (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 390) 3639; (2017) 1 NWLR (PT.1546) 256

CHIEFTAINCY MATTERS - Custom & tradition - In written form - Where such law is reduced to writing - It is known as chieftaincy

declaration - Regulating nomination and selection of candidates (H13) Esuwoye v. Bosere (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 390) 3639; (2017) 1 NWLR (PT.1546) 256

CHIEFTAINCY MATTERS - Filing of - Condition for - Compliance with Chiefs Law s. 3(3) as to Governor's final say - Is imperative before filing the matter in Court - Otherwise Courts will lack jurisdiction to adjudicate on the matter (H4) Bukoye v. Adeyemo (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 390) 3565; (2017) 1 NWLR (PT.1546) 173

CHIEFTAINCY MATTERS - Legislation - Fresh issue of jurisdiction - Raising the issue in Chiefs Law s. 3(3) for first time in SC is correct - As such issue may or may not be pleaded - And may be raised without leave (H6) A-G of Kwara State v. Adeyemo (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 389) 3209; (2017) 1 NWLR (PT.1546) 211

CHIEFTAINCY MATTERS - Native law & custom - Proof - It is Exhibit DFC2 and not exhibit J - That represents prevailing native law and custom of Offa people - In relation to Olofa of Offa stool (H12) Esuwoye v. Bosere (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 390) 3639; (2017) 1 NWLR (PT.1546) 256

CHIEFTAINCY MATTERS - Ruling houses - Rotational policy - From oral testimonies of witnesses and exhibits DFC2 & J - There is no evidence to support the case of rotation between the houses (H11) Esuwoye v. Bosere (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 390) 3639; (2017) 1 NWLR (PT.1546) 256

COMPANY LAW - Jurisdiction - Absence of - Effect - The trial court and Court of Appeal acted in vain - As appellant's complaint governed by CAMA ss. 262 & 266 - Should have been brought at Federal High Court (H2) Oni v. Cadbury Nig. Plc. (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 461; (2016) 9 NWLR (PT.1516) 80

CONSTITUTIONAL - Judicial precedents - Stare decisis - Constitution 1999 s. 287 - In the hierarchy of courts - A lower court is bound by the decision of a higher court (H4) Nig. Agip Oil Co. Ltd. v. Nkweke (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 378) 591; (2016) 7 NWLR (PT.1512) 588

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - Actions - Commencement - Validity - No matter how malicious an action may be - As long as it is lawful and constitutional - It cannot be held to be an abuse of court process (H7) Alafia v. Gbode Ven. Nig. Ltd. (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 243; (2016) 7 NWLR (PT.1510) 116

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - Appeals - Issue - Reframing of - Fair hearing - In reframing issues appellate court must secure fundamental basis of appellate system - And guarantee rights of parties to fair hearing under the Constitution (H2) Okere v. State (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 963

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - Appeals - Rights - Limit - Although the right is constitutional - Yet exercise of same must be within bounds and not at large - Hence appellant is not provided with unregulated procedure in filing appeal (H2) Ladoja v. Ajimobi (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 382) 1691; (2016) 10 NWLR (PT.1519) 87

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - Constitution - Supremacy of - By virtue of Constitution 1999 s. 1(3) - All other laws must not only be consistent with Constitution - But derive their potency from it (H1) Ochala v. FRN (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 445; (2016) 17 NWLR (Pt.1541) 169

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - Constitution - Supremacy of - The Ekiti State House of Assembly must act within Constitutional limit - As any of its laws which are inconsistent with Constitution are bound to be nullified (H3) Governor Ekiti State v. Olubunmo (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 392) 4411; (2017) 3 NWLR (PT.1551) 1

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - Courts - FHC - Additional jurisdiction - By virtue of Constitution 1999 s. 251(1) - National Assembly may expand jurisdiction of the court - To adjudicate over any matter not listed in s. 251 (H1) Ekagbara v. Ikpeazu (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 378) 565; (2016) 4 NWLR (PT.1503) 411

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - Election petitions - Appeals - Right of - By ordering INEC to issue certificate of return to 1^st respondent - Appellant's constitutional right of appeal was foreclosed (H7) Ikpeazu

v. Otti (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 381) 1377; (2016) 8 NWLR (PT.1513) 38

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - Elections - Governorship - Supremacy of Constitution - Appellant cannot rely on guidelines of political party - At the expense of non compliance with other guidelines - And s.177 of 1999 (H14) Agi v. PDP (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 392) 4291

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - Fair hearing - Breach - Allegation - By choosing to stay away from court after being notified of the hearing - Appellants are not covered by 1999 Constitution s. 36(1) bordering on fair hearing (H5) Ezechukwu v. Onwuka (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 855; (2016) 5 NWLR (PT.1506) 529

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - Fair hearing - Breach of constitutional right of fair hearing in any trial nullifies the trial - And decision taken thereon is also a nullity (H3) Chitra K. & W. Manu. Co. Ltd. v. Akingbade (2016) 5 KLR (pt. 386) 2637; (2016) 14 NWLR (PT.1533) 487

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - Fair hearing - Right to - Constitution 1999 s. 36(1) - Parties to a dispute before court or tribunal - Are entitled to a fair hearing - As each party must be heard (H2) Achuzia v. Ogbomah (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 380) 1023; (2016) 11 NWLR (PT.1522) 59

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - Federal High Court - Jurisdiction - Expansion of - National Assembly can by the Constitution expand its jurisdiction As it did in preelection matters - Which can be exclusive - Or exercised concurrently with other courts (H4) Garba v. Mohammed (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 388) 2989; (2016) 16 NWLR (PT.1537) 114

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - Fundamental rights - Provision of - The Constitution guarantees fair trial of appellant - Hence Court cannot undermine rights of appellant - In the event of his prosecution (H3) Kalu v. FRN (2016) 3 KLR (pt. 383) 2147; (2016) 9 NWLR (PT.1516) 1

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - Interpretation - 1999 Constitution s. 251(1)(a) & (p) - Application of - For the provision to apply in a suit

- Such must involve administration and management of Federal Agency (H3) John Shoy Int. Ltd. v. F HA (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 388) 3037; (2016) 14 NWLR (PT.1533) 427

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - Interpretation - Principle - Constitutional provisions must be considered as a whole - The language is to be given a reasonable construction - And absurd consequences are to be avoided (H2) Faleke v. INEC (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 391) 4109; (2016) 18 NWLR (PT.1543) 61

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - Jurisdiction - Determination of - Jurisdiction are conferred by the Constitution - And it is the claim presented by the plaintiff - That determines jurisdiction of the Court (H1) John Shoy Int. Ltd. v. F HA (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 388) 3037; (2016) 14 NWLR (PT.1533) 427

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - Jurisdiction - Federal High Court - Constitution 1999 s. 251(1)(p),(q),(r)(s) - Conferred exclusive jurisdiction on FHC - In a matter in which FG or any of its agency is involved (H2) Adegbite v. Amosu (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 389) 3185; (2016) 15 NWLR (PT.1536) 405

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - Jurisdiction - Of Federal High Court - Extent of - The court is not limited by its exclusive jurisdiction in s. 251(1)(a) to (r) - As it can exercise other concurrent jurisdiction with State High Courts (H5) Garba v. Mohammed (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 388) 2989; (2016) 16 NWLR (PT.1537) 114

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - Supreme Court - Appeals - Hearing - Power - The Court cannot review appeal that was heard on abandoned notice - As its power under SC Act s. 22 cannot override Constitution 1999 s. 233 (H3) Abiodun v. FRN (2016) 3 KLR (pt. 384) 2229; (2016) 9 NWLR (PT.1516) 126

CONTEMPT OF COURT - Committal order - Even if it is found that 2^nd respondent was served with Form 48 - The finding would still not have cured the defect in issuance of Form 48 (H11) Alafia v. Gbode Ven. Nig. Ltd. (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 243; (2016) 7 NWLR (PT.1510) 116

CONTEMPT OF COURT - Committal order - Until committal order made by trial court is challenged and set aside by Court of Appeal - 2^nd respondent will remain a convict (H8) Alafia v. Gbode Ven. Nig. Ltd. (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 243; (2016) 7 NWLR (PT.1510) 116

CONTEMPT OF COURT - Concept - It is an affront to authority of court - Which can either be ex facie curiae or in facie curiae - And it is nobody's duty to determine for court - When party is in contempt (H10) Brittania-U Nig. Ltd. v. Seplat Pet. Dev. Co. Ltd. (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 789; (2016) 4 NWLR (PT.1503) 541

CONTRACTS - Banking - Loan agreement - Repayment of - Terms for repayment stated in Exhibit B still remain - Hence appellant cannot unilaterally opt out of the contract - And cannot be relieved of the obligation to repay the loan (H1) Lewis v. UBA Plc. (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 359; (2016) 6 NWLR (PT.1508) 329

CONTRACTS - Breach - Locus standi - Respondent having demonstrated sufficient locus cannot be referred to as stranger - Hence it can seek for redress for breach of contract against appellant (H3) B.B. Apugo & S. Ltd. v. Orthopaedic H. M. B. (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 388) 2931; (2016) 13 NWLR (PT.1529) 206

CONTRACTS - Evidence - Proof - As evidence abound that appellant approached respondent to get buyer of his property - It can be said that there is proof of contractual relationship between the parties (H5) Okafor v. Abumofuani (2016) 4 KLR (pt. 385) 2517; (2016) 12 NWLR (PT.1525) 117

CONTRACTS - Jurisdiction - Breach - The claim here is for special and general damages - As such the fact of conveying the goods by sea - Does not bring the claim within admiralty jurisdiction of FHC (H5) B.B. Apugo & S. Ltd. v. Orthopaedic H. M. B. (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 388) 2931; (2016) 13 NWLR (PT.1529) 206

CONTRACTS - Obligation - Performance of - Appellant having taken benefit under the contract - Cannot avoid its obligations therein on the ground that the contract is void (H4) B.B. Apugo & S. Ltd. v.

Orthopaedic H. M. B. (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 388) 2931; (2016) 13 NWLR (PT.1529) 206

CONTRACTS - Privity of - For action in contract to be sustained - There must be privity of contract - Hence appellant relying on relief in equity without substance - Cannot set up a cause of action against respondent (H2) Reichie v. NBCI (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 380) 1253; (2016) 8 NWLR (PT.1514) 294

CONTRACTS - Privity of - Only parties to a contract can maintain action on it - As stranger to a contract can neither sue nor be sued thereon - Even if the contract is made for his benefit (H2) B.B. Apugo & S. Ltd. v. Orthopaedic H. M. B. (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 388) 2931; (2016) 13 NWLR (PT.1529) 206

CONTRACTS - Terms - Binding nature of - Parties are bound by the contract they entered into - And the terms and conditions must be respected by court (H2) Lewis v. UBA Plc. (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 359; (2016) 6 NWLR (PT.1508) 329

CONTRACTS - Terms - Liability - Agency - Although agent of a disclosed principal is not personally liable - But appellant failed to prove existence of any such relationship as to avoid liability (H9) B.B. Apugo & S. Ltd. v. Orthopaedic H. M. B. (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 388) 2931; (2016) 13 NWLR (PT.1529) 206

CONVEYANCING - Agreements - Pleadings - Oral evidence is not allowed for transaction reduced to writing - And once the writings are specifically pleaded as conveyance - It has to be registered to be allowed to be pleaded (H1) Chitra K. & W. Manu. Co. Ltd. v. Akingbade (2016) 5 KLR (pt. 386) 2637; (2016) 14 NWLR (PT.1533) 487

CONVICTION - Alibi - Defence - Failure to investigate - As appellant's defence of alibi was not investigated - He is entitled to an acquittal and not the conviction handed on him by trial court (H6) Osuagwu v. State (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 389) 3437; (2016) 16 NWLR (PT.1537) 31

CONVICTION - Appeals - Conviction - Appellant has not shown that

the findings leading to his conviction - Did not evolve from evidence on record - As to warrant interference of SC (H3) Kpoobari v. FRN (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 376) 125; (2016) 13 NWLR (Pt.1528) 81

CONVICTION - Armed robbery - Confession - Besides appellant's confession - His conviction is a cumulative result of the confession - And evidence of the victims of the crime (H3) John v. State (2016) 3 KLR (pt. 384) 2313; (2016) 11 NWLR (PT.1523) 191

CONVICTION - Armed robbery - Death sentence - Having found that prosecution proved its case against appellant - The sentence of death is the only option for the trial court (H4) John v. State (2016) 3 KLR (pt. 384) 2313; (2016) 11 NWLR (PT.1523) 191

CONVICTION - Circumstantial evidence - For such evidence to ground a conviction - It must be positive and point to the guilt of the accused person (H1) Abokokuyanro v. State (2016) 3 KLR (pt. 384) 2245; (2016) 9 NWLR (PT.1518) 520

CONVICTION - Confession - Accused can be convicted on his confession - In which he admitted the commission of the crime as charged (H3) Bouwor v. State (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 775; (2016) 4 NWLR (PT.1502) 295

CONVICTION - Confession - Accused can be convicted on his confessional statement alone - If same is positive and made voluntarily (H1) Afolabi v. State (2016) 4 KLR (pt. 385) 2391; (2016) 11 NWLR (PT.1524) 497

CONVICTION - Confession - Accused can be convicted purely on his confession - Once the confession is direct and positive (H1) Okoh v. State (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 382) 1841; (2016) 10 NWLR (PT.1521) 455

CONVICTION - Confession - Conviction - Provided that a confessional statement is direct and voluntary - It is enough to support a conviction (H4) Olanipekun v. State (2016) 5 KLR (pt. 386) 2683; (2016) 13 NWLR (PT.1528) 100

CONVICTION - Confession - Corroboration - Though desirable and is available in this case - A satisfactory confessional statement alone is sufficient to ground conviction (H5) Akinrinlola v. State (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 389) 3239; (2016) 16 NWLR (PT.1537) 73

CONVICTION - Confession - Court can in absence of corroborative evidence - Convict accused on his confession alone - Once it is satisfied that the same was voluntary (H5) Baalo v. FRN (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 387) 2761; (2016) 13 NWLR (PT.1530) 400

CONVICTION - Confession - Court may convict accused on his confessional statement alone - Once the confession is free and voluntary (H1) Asimi v. State (2016) 5 KLR (pt. 386) 2573; (2016) 12 NWLR (PT.1527) 414

CONVICTION - Confession - Solola case on double interpretation - Does not apply - Where conviction is not solely based on the confessional statement (H3) Akinrinlola v. State (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 389) 3239; (2016) 16 NWLR (PT.1537) 73

CONVICTION - Confession - Where a confession is positive and satisfactorily proved - It is sufficient without further corroboration - To warrant a conviction (H1) Ikpo v. State (2016) 3 KLR (pt. 383) 2119; (2016) 10 NWLR (PT.1521) 501

CONVICTION - Confession - Where Court is satisfied that confession is direct and positive - It can convict on the confession alone (H1) Imoh v. State (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 389) 3337; (2016) 17 NWLR (PT.1540) 117

CONVICTION - Confession - Where found to be voluntarily and positively made - Confession is enough to ground a finding of guilt - Despite any retraction from the maker (H5) Kayode v. State (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 380) 1139; (2016) 7 NWLR (PT.1511) 199

CONVICTION - Conspiracy - Distinctive nature - Failure to prove substantive offence - Does not render conviction for conspiracy inappropriate - As it is a separate offence in itself (H3) Kayode v. State (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 380) 1139; (2016) 7 NWLR (PT.1511) 199

CONVICTION - Conspiracy - Validity - Conspiracy being a separate offence from actual crime - Conviction on same is valid although proof of the actual crime is not established (H4) Bouwor v. State (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 775; (2016) 4 NWLR (PT.1502) 295

CONVICTION - Correctness of - Armed robbery - Trial court was right to have found appellant guilty as charged - As respondent has established all ingredients of the offence beyond reasonable doubt (H3) Eyo v. State (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 376) 39; (2016) 7 NWLR (PT.1510) 183

CONVICTION - CPA s. 218 - Requires that once court is satisfied that accused intended - To admit the truth of all elements of the offence - It can convict and sentence him (H4) Baalo v. FRN (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 387) 2761; (2016) 13 NWLR (PT.1530) 400

CONVICTION - Evidence - Confession - Validity of - Once court is satisfied with its truth - Confessional statement is sufficient to ground a conviction without corroboration (H5) Lawal v. State (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 388) 3059; (2016) 14 NWLR (PT.1531) 69

CONVICTION - Evidence - Credibility of witness - Conviction of appellant based on evidence of PW3 was proper - As the witness positively identified him as perpetrator of the crime (H1) Okiemute v. State (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 389) 3401; (2016) 15 NWLR (PT.1535) 297

CONVICTION - Evidence - Single witness - Weight - Evidence of a single witness can justify conviction - If such evidence proves the case alleged - And is believed by Court which received it (H2) Ighalo v. State (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 389) 3311; (2016) 17 NWLR (PT.1540) 1

CONVICTION - Evidence - Single witness - Weight - Evidence of single witness when found credible is sufficient without more - To secure conviction of the accused (H3) Abokokuyanro v. State (2016) 3 KLR (pt. 384) 2245; (2016) 9 NWLR (PT.1518) 520

CONVICTION - Manslaughter - Self defence - Appellant has failed to

bring his conduct to be entitled to the defence - To exonerate him from conviction for the offence of manslaughter (H4) Famakinwa v. State (2016) 3 KLR (pt. 383) 2077; (2016) 11 NWLR (PT.1524) 538

CONVICTION - Manslaughter - Sentence - From circumstances surrounding the stabbing and death of the deceased - CA was right in substituting conviction of murder with that of manslaughter against appellant (H3) Famakinwa v. State (2016) 3 KLR (pt. 383) 2077; (2016) 11 NWLR (PT.1524) 538

CONVICTION - Murder - Absence of eyewitness - Where accused confesses to a crime in absence of eyewitness of killing a person - He can be convicted on his confession alone (H2) Afolabi v. State (2016) 4 KLR (pt. 385) 2391; (2016) 11 NWLR (PT.1524) 497

CONVICTION - Murder - Evidence - Evaluation - Trial court properly evaluated evidence and convicted appellant - As his case that the burns on deceased were from Exhibits P16 & 17 - Cannot be sustained (H6) Ezeuko v. State (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 380) 1057; (2016) 6 NWLR (PT.1509) 529

CONVICTION - Proof - CA rightly affirmed conviction and sentence of appellant - And that prosecution discharged the burden of proof - Having regards to Exhibits P1-P7 and appellant's confession (H2) Abdullahi v. FRN (2016) 3 KLR (pt. 383) 2059; (2016) 10 NWLR (PT.1521) 475

CONVICTION - Rape - Sentence - Once court convicts accused for rape as defined in CC s. 357 - It has no discretion but is bound to obey the law - By imposing a term of imprisonment for life (H8) Lucky v. State (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 387) 2849; (2016) 13 NWLR (PT.1528) 128

CONVICTION - Retracted confession - Accused can be convicted on such confession - If Court is satisfied that he made the statement (H2) Asuquo v. State (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 387) 2741; (2016) 14 NWLR (PT.1532) 309

CONVICTION - Retracted confession - Court can convict on such confession - Which accused not only resiled from - But also contradicted in his testimony before court (H3) Asimi v. State (2016) 5 KLR (pt. 386) 2573; (2016) 12 NWLR (PT.1527) 414

CONVICTION - Summary trial - Advantages of - Where accused is arraigned and he pleads guilty - Court can summarily convict him - Provided it is satisfied that accused understood the charge (H1) Baalo v. FRN (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 387) 2761; (2016) 13 NWLR (PT.1530) 400

CORROBORATION - Confession - Veracity of a confession is tested inter alia - By whether it is possible - And consistent with other established facts (H4) Akinrinlola v. State (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 389) 3239; (2016) 16 NWLR (PT.1537) 73

CORROBORATION - Conviction - Confession - Where a confession is positive and satisfactorily proved - It is sufficient without further corroboration - To warrant a conviction (H1) Ikpo v. State (2016) 3 KLR (pt. 383) 2119; (2016) 10 NWLR (PT.1521) 501

CORROBORATION - Proof - Single witness - Evidence of a witness if believed - Can be acted upon by court to establish a case beyond reasonable doubt - Except where corroboration is required (H3) Nwokocha v. A-G Imo State (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 381) 1457; (2016) 8 NWLR (PT.1513) 141

CORROBORATION - Rape - As there is proof of forceful penetration - Evidence of PW3 corroborated that of PW1 that the latter was raped - Within the intendment of Criminal Code Law s. 357 (H3) Lucky v. State (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 387) 2849; (2016) 13 NWLR (PT.1528) 128

CORROBORATION - Rape - Proof - Corroboration - Oath - PW1 being a minor needed no corroboration of her evidence - Which was sworn on oath (H2) Isa v. Kano State (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 329; (2016) 6 NWLR (PT.1508) 243

COURT PROCESSES - Abuse - Appeals - Common feature of abuse

of process that centres on improper use of process by party - To interfere with justice - Is not applicable to facts of present appeal (H2) Allanah v. Kpolokwu (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 279; (2016) 6 NWLR (PT.1507) 1

COURT PROCESSES - Abuse - Features - Instituting multiple actions by using similar processes in respect of same right - Is abuse of legal process - Which fundamentally attacks jurisdiction of court (H3) Ladoja v. Ajimobi (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 382) 1691; (2016) 10 NWLR (PT.1519) 87

COURT PROCESSES - Abuse of - Feature - It shows in multiplicity of suits between same parties - And in respect of same subject matter - Taken out by a party to overreach or annoy the other party (H17) FRN v. Nwosu (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 390) 3709; (2016) 17 NWLR (PT.1541) 226

COURT PROCESSES - Abuse of - Features - Concept of abuse of process is the improper use of judicial process - By a litigant to interfere with the administration of justice (H2) Bukoye v. Adeyemo (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 390) 3565; (2017) 1 NWLR (PT.1546) 173

COURT PROCESSES - Actions - Commencement - Validity - No matter how malicious an action may be - As long as it is lawful and constitutional - It cannot be held to be an abuse of court process (H7) Alafia v. Gbode Ven. Nig. Ltd. (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 243; (2016) 7 NWLR (PT.1510) 116

COURT PROCESSES - Actions - Hearing notice - Service of - Court must satisfy itself of service of the notice - Before it proceeds with hearing and judgment - Otherwise the proceeding no matter how well conducted is a nullity (H1) Achuzia v. Ogbomah (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 380) 1023; (2016) 11 NWLR (PT.1522) 59

COURT PROCESSES - Actions - Multiplicity of suit - Abuse of process - Appellant's act of filing present suit on the same relief as in a previous suit - Amounts to an abuse of process (H4) Mabamije v. Otto (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 379; (2016) 13 NWLR (Pt.1529) 171

COURT PROCESSES - Actions - Multiplicity of suits - Different parties - Where parties in multiplied suits are not the same - There cannot be said to be an abuse of court process (H5) Oguebego v. PDP (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 921; (2016) 4 NWLR (PT.1503) 446

COURT PROCESSES - Amendment - Effect - Amendment of Court process takes effect from date of the original document sought to be amended (H1) Okafor v. Bende Div. Union (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 393) 4687; (2017) 5 NWLR (PT.1559) 385

COURT PROCESSES - Appeals - Filing - Multiple notices - Provided that each notice of appeal was filed within time - And appellant specifically chose particular notice to rely upon - There was no abuse of court process (H2) Garba v. Mohammed (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 388) 2989; (2016) 16 NWLR (PT.1537) 114

COURT PROCESSES - Appeals - Notice of - Filing - Notice of appeal is an initiating process - Which must be properly filed before there is a valid appeal - As an appeal is incompetent where notice is defective (H1) Abiodun v. FRN (2016) 3 KLR (pt. 384) 2229; (2016) 9 NWLR (PT.1516) 126

COURT PROCESSES - Appeals - Notice of - Importance of - It is the structure on which all subsequent processes in appellate court derive their support - As no such process can stand without subsistence of a valid notice (H1) Apeh v. PDP (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 378) 509; (2016) 7 NWLR (PT.1510) 153

COURT PROCESSES - Case law - Failure to apply - Non application of the two case laws - Means that CA did not accept appellant's case based on abuse of process - Hence issue of incorrect application did not arise (H9) Brittania-U Nig. Ltd. v. Seplat Pet. Dev. Co. Ltd. (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 789; (2016) 4 NWLR (PT.1503) 541

COURT PROCESSES - Contentious service - Where service evidenced in affidavit was disputed - Trial Court must satisfy itself that the actual originating process it dealt with was duly served (H3) Idisi v. Ecodril Nig. Ltd. (2016) 5 KLR (pt. 386) 2661; (2016) 12 NWLR (PT.1527) 355

COURT PROCESSES - Fair hearing - Breach - Allegation - By choosing to stay away from court after being notified of the hearing - Appellants are not covered by 1999 Constitution s. 36(1) bordering on fair hearing (H5) Ezechukwu v. Onwuka (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 855; (2016) 5 NWLR (PT.1506) 529

COURT PROCESSES - Hearing notice - Service of - The notice being the only legal means of getting a party to appear in court - Failure to issue and serve same is a denial of justice (H4) Apeh v. PDP (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 378) 509; (2016) 7 NWLR (PT.1510) 153

COURT PROCESSES - Jurisdiction - Federal High Court - The court has jurisdiction to protect the sanctity of its order and processes - Which 1^st respondent chose to act in gross disobedience to (H2) Oguebego v. PDP (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 921; (2016) 4 NWLR (PT.1503) 446

COURT PROCESSES - Names of parties - Listing of - Amendment - Failure to state full names of remaining 16 respondents - Was irregularity that can be cured by amendment (H2) Okafor v. Bende Div. Union (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 393) 4687; (2017) 5 NWLR (PT.1559) 385

COURT PROCESSES - Service - Affidavit of - Where such is deposed to by a person effecting service - Setting out the facts and date of service - It shall be prima facie proof of matters stated therein (H2) Idisi v. Ecodril Nig. Ltd. (2016) 5 KLR (pt. 386) 2661; (2016) 12 NWLR (PT.1527) 355

COURT PROCESSES - Service - Failure of - Where service is required and there is failure to effect same - It affects jurisdiction of Court to adjudicate on the matter (H4) Idisi v. Ecodril Nig. Ltd. (2016) 5 KLR (pt. 386) 2661; (2016) 12 NWLR (PT.1527) 355

COURT PROCESSES - Service of - Issuance and service of process is fundamental to exercise of jurisdiction - As any defect would amount to breach of a party's right to fair hearing (H7) B.B. Apugo & S. Ltd. v. Orthopaedic H. M. B. (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 388) 2931; (2016) 13

NWLR (PT.1529) 206

COURT PROCESSES - Signing - Validity of - Processes are signed by qualified legal practitioners and not law firms - As any process otherwise initiated - Would amount to a void process (H4) Okpe v. Fan Milk Plc (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 393) 4733; (2017) 2 NWLR (PT.1549) 282

COURT PROCESSES - Validity - Void process cannot be allowed merely because there was no complaint against it - As where invalid process is discovered - The same must be declared null and void (H6) Okpe v. Fan Milk Plc (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 393) 4733; (2017) 2 NWLR (PT.1549) 282

COURTS - Actions - Commencement - Originating summons - As there is no dispute on the relevant facts in the matter - Originating summons was properly used to institute the suit at the FHC (H8) Oguebego v. PDP (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 921; (2016) 4 NWLR (PT.1503) 446

COURTS - Actions - Declaratory relief - Basis for grant - Plaintiff must satisfy Court by credible evidence - That he is entitled to the right he claims - As the relief is not granted even on admission of defendant (H3) GE Int. Operations Nig. Ltd. v. Q. Oil & Gas Services Ltd. (2016) 3 KLR (pt. 383) 2093; (2016) 10 NWLR (PT.1520) 304

COURTS - Actions - Jurisdiction - Once a matter is not properly constituted - The court lacks the jurisdiction to entertain it (H1) Alafia v. Gbode Ven. Nig. Ltd. (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 243; (2016) 7 NWLR (PT.1510) 116

COURTS - Actions - Locus standi - Where plaintiff lacks the locus to maintain his action - No issue in the case can be gone into - As the court is denied of jurisdiction to determine the action (H3) Okwu v. Umeh (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 989; (2016) 4 NWLR (PT.1501) 120

COURTS - Actions - Striking out - Reenlistment - Appellant whose case was struck out - Can reapply to same Court - To have the case reenlisted - Provided he satisfies Court to exercise discretion in his

favour (H2) PDP v. Asadu (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 392) 4553; (2016) 17 NWLR (PT.1541) 215

COURTS - Affidavit - Reliance on - Court ought not to act on affidavit bereft of facts - Showing source of information of deponent - Where he was not deposing from personal knowledge (H2) Mgbenwelu v. Olumba (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 391) 4255; (2017) 5 NWLR (PT.1558) 169

COURTS - Affidavits - Conflicts - Resolution - Where there are conflicts in affidavit on material issue - Court is expected to invite parties and call for oral evidence - To resolve the conflict (H3) Mabamije v. Otto (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 379; (2016) 13 NWLR (Pt.1529) 171

COURTS - Affidavits - Conflicts - Resolution of - Where conflicts exist in deposition of parties - Court must resolve same by calling for oral evidence - Either from the deponent or other witnesses (H1) Ezechukwu v. Onwuka (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 855; (2016) 5 NWLR (PT.1506) 529

COURTS - Alibi - Test of - Court must test evidence of alibi against evidence led by prosecution in rebuttal - And where it doubts the guilt of accused - Accused must enjoy the benefit of such doubt (H5) Godsgift v. State (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 387) 2797; (2016) 13 NWLR (PT.1530) 444

COURTS - Appeals - CA - Issues - Resolution of - The court being an intermediate court - Is admonished to pronounce on all issues arising in appeal before it - Even if the appeal has been disposed of by core issues (H4) Ikpeazu v. Otti (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 381) 1377; (2016) 8 NWLR (PT.1513) 38

COURTS - Appeals - Consistency - Appeal is continuation of a trial - As there should be consistency in prosecuting a case - At trial court as well as in the appeal court (H1) Ladoja v. Ajimobi (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 382) 1691; (2016) 10 NWLR (PT.1519) 87

COURTS - Appeals - Discretion - Exercise of - Interference - Appellate court does not interfere - Save where the exercise of discretion

was manifestly wrong (H4) Braithwaite v. Dalhatu (2016) 4 KLR (pt. 385) 2425; (2016) 13 NWLR (PT.1528) 32

COURTS - Appeals - Evaluation - Where conflict still exists in affidavit after a resolution by calling for oral evidence - CA as well as SC is qualified to further appraise the affidavit (H2) Ezechukwu v. Onwuka (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 855; (2016) 5 NWLR (PT.1506) 529

COURTS - Appeals - Extension of time - Conditions - Court must be satisfied with applicant's explanation of failure to appeal within time - And the ground must show good cause why appeal should be heard (H1) Braithwaite v. Dalhatu (2016) 4 KLR (pt. 385) 2425; (2016) 13 NWLR (PT.1528) 32

COURTS - Appeals - Extension of time - Conditions - Exception - Court will not inquire about reason for delay - Where ground raises issue of lack of jurisdiction (H2) Braithwaite v. Dalhatu (2016) 4 KLR (pt. 385) 2425; (2016) 13 NWLR (PT.1528) 32

COURTS - Appeals - Filing - Final decision - The order given by CA being a final one - SC Act s. 27(2)(a) guards the filing of notice of appeal - Thus appellant has three months within which to file the notice (H1) Nig. Agip Oil Co. Ltd. v. Nkweke (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 378) 591; (2016) 7 NWLR (PT.1512) 588

COURTS - Appeals - Filing - Rules of Court - Where there is no provision in rules of Federal High Court relating to appeals to Court of Appeal - Rules of Court of Appeal should be applied (H3) Nig. Agip Oil Co. Ltd. v. Nkweke (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 378) 591; (2016) 7 NWLR (PT.1512) 588

COURTS - Appeals - Filing fee - Proper venue - In respect of appeal which is as of right - Filing fee is payable at registry of High Court - But where leave is granted to file notice - Fee is payable at appeal court (H2) Nig. Agip Oil Co. Ltd. v. Nkweke (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 378) 591; (2016) 7 NWLR (PT.1512) 588

COURTS - Appeals - Findings - Validity of - There is no basis for reversal of decision of CA - As there was sufficient material before the

court - From which it made its findings and conclusions (H7) Faleye v. Dada (2016) 4 KLR (pt. 385) 2479; (2016) 15 NWLR (PT.1534) 80

COURTS - Appeals - Grounds - Challenge - It is duty of respondent who challenges classification of ground - To satisfy court that the ground belongs to a classification - Different from one assigned by appellant (H3) Brittania-U Nig. Ltd. v. Seplat Pet. Dev. Co. Ltd. (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 789; (2016) 4 NWLR (PT.1503) 541

COURTS - Appeals - Grounds - Classification of - To classify ground of law or mixed law and facts - Court should examine the grounds and their particulars - And identify the substance of the appeal (H4) Umanah v. NDIC (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 389) 3465; (2016) 14 NWLR (PT.1533) 458

COURTS - Appeals - Grounds - Determination - Principle - Court must give regard to the particulars and consider them together - So as to ascertain the category to which they fit into (H5) Allanah v. Kpolokwu (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 279; (2016) 6 NWLR (PT.1507) 1

COURTS - Appeals - Grounds - Validity - Grounds must lie from decision of CA to SC - Hence appellant's ground 2 that attacks acts of registry of CA - Instead of acts of any of the Justices is incompetent (H2) Ikpeazu v. Otti (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 381) 1377; (2016) 8 NWLR (PT.1513) 38

COURTS - Appeals - Grounds - Validity - The whole decision of CA having been made subject to appeal - Substance of the grounds and their particulars have to be considered - Thus grounds 1 & 4 are valid (H1) Yahaya v. Dankwanbo (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 378) 721; (2016) 7 NWLR (PT.1511) 284

COURTS - Appeals - Issue - Determination - Incidental order - Appellate court can make an order once same is incidental to issue in appeal - Even if same was not sought and parties have not been heard (H3) Tindafai v. Jara (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 376) 217; (2016) 8 NWLR (PT.1513) 19

COURTS - Appeals - Issue - Determination of - Court's omission to consider and resolve any of the issues agitating the appeal - In absence of any valid reason - Will be fatal to the court's judgment (H3) Okere v. State (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 963

COURTS - Appeals - Issue - Determination of - Issue of malice was not raised suo motu and resolved without hearing the parties - As it was argued by parties and considered by the court (H2) Mainstreet Bank Ltd. v. Binna (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 381) 1433; (2016) 12 NWLR (PT.1526) 316

COURTS - Appeals - Issue - Preference of - CA did not err when it preferred issues distilled by respondent to those of appellant - As this was done for sake of justice - By bringing out clearly the issue in dispute (H4) Okere v. State (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 963

COURTS - Appeals - Issue - Validity - Issue of controversy as to which organ of 1^st respondent - Has power to conduct primaries as held by CA cannot stand - As that was not the main issue (H7) Oguebego v. PDP (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 921; (2016) 4 NWLR (PT.1503) 446

COURTS - Appeals - Issues - Accelerated hearing - The issues being weighty must be settled in good time - As court does not encourage delays in proceedings between parties (H1) Barbedos Ven. Ltd. v. FBN Plc. (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 321; (2016) 11 NWLR (PT.1523) 301

COURTS - Appeals - Issues - Determination - No miscarriage of justice was done to appellant - As his case was considered before CA concluded that - Trial court in its ruling went into the merits of the case (H1) Egharevba v. FRN (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 382) 1543; (2016) 10 NWLR (PT.1521) 431

COURTS - Appeals - Jurisdiction - Stay of execution - Where there is appeal from CA to SC - Both courts have concurrent jurisdiction in an application for stay of execution - Pending determination of the appeal (H1) Nig. Agric. Coop. Bank Ltd. v. Ozoemelam (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 407; (2016) 9 NWLR (PT.1517) 376

COURTS - Appeals - Powers of CA - The consequential order remitting appeal to appropriate court - For same to be determined on merit - Falls within the powers of Court of Appeal (H1) Dantani v. Garba (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 376) 31; (2016) 7 NWLR (PT.1510) 74

COURTS - Appeals - Record - Transmission of - CA Rule O. 8 r. 1 - Registrar of court below has duty to compile and transmit its record to CA - Within 60 days after the filing of notice of appeal (H4) Brittania-U Nig. Ltd. v. Seplat Pet. Dev. Co. Ltd. (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 789; (2016) 4 NWLR (PT.1503) 541

COURTS - Appeals - Remittal order - Powers of CA - Appeal was properly remitted by CA to the HC for hearing in its appellate jurisdiction - Despite the nullification of proceedings of Sharia CA on basis of lack of jurisdiction (H2) Salihu v. Wasiu (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 376) 201; (2016) 5 NWLR (PT.1506) 423

COURTS - Appeals - Remittal order - Powers of CA - Having found that Sharia CA lacked jurisdiction - CA was within its powers in remitting appeal to HC - For hearing on merits in its appellate jurisdiction (H1) Tindafai v. Jara (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 376) 217; (2016) 8 NWLR (PT.1513) 19

COURTS - Appeals - Remittal order - Powers of CA - The order remitting the matter to appropriate court for trial on the merits - Falls squarely within CA power as statutorily conferred (H1) Mamman v. Hajo (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 376) 153; (2016) 8 NWLR (PT.1515) 411

COURTS - Appeals - Respondent's notice - Filing - Where respondent is of the view that appellate court should vary decision of lower court - He has to file a respondent's notice to that effect (H2) Nsirim v. Amadi (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 427; (2016) 5 NWLR (PT.1504) 42

COURTS - Appeals - Transfer of - Powers of Sharia Court of Appeal - The Court can transfer appeal to HC - Where it is of the opinion that an appeal from Area Court - Should have properly been brought to HC (H2) Tindafai v. Jara (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 376) 217; (2016) 8 NWLR (PT.1513) 19

COURTS - Armed robbery - Conviction - Correctness of - Trial court was right to have found appellant guilty as charged - As respondent has established all ingredients of the offence beyond reasonable doubt (H3) Eyo v. State (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 376) 39; (2016) 7 NWLR (PT.1510) 183

COURTS - Case law - Application of - Court is not bound to apply any authority it has considered in its judgment - As it may not apply an authority - If issue decided therein is inapplicable to facts before it (H8) Brittania-U Nig. Ltd. v. Seplat Pet. Dev. Co. Ltd. (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 789; (2016) 4 NWLR (PT.1503) 541

COURTS - Case law - Failure to apply - Non application of the two case laws - Means that CA did not accept appellant's case based on abuse of process - Hence issue of incorrect application did not arise (H9) Brittania-U Nig. Ltd. v. Seplat Pet. Dev. Co. Ltd. (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 789; (2016) 4 NWLR (PT.1503) 541

COURTS - Competence - Defect in - Bars Court from proceeding further - In the absence of jurisdiction - As the action no matter how well considered - Will amount to a nullity (H2) FRN v. Nwosu (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 390) 3709; (2016) 17 NWLR (PT.1541) 226

COURTS - Competence of - Conditions - Court is competent when inter alia it is properly constituted - Subject matter is within its jurisdiction - And action is initiated by due process of law (H1) Diamond Bank Ltd. v. Ugochukwu (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 382) 1525; (2016) 9 NWLR (PT.1517) 193

COURTS - Competence of - Conditions - Court is competent where it is properly composed - The subject matter of action is within its jurisdiction - And the matter is initiated by due process of law (H1) FRN v. Nwosu (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 390) 3709; (2016) 17 NWLR (PT.1541) 226

COURTS - Competence of - Conditions - To assume jurisdiction in a matter - Action must be commenced by due process of law - No feature depriving Court of jurisdiction - And Court must be properly

constituted (H3) Okpe v. Fan Milk Plc (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 393) 4733; (2017) 2 NWLR (PT.1549) 282

COURTS - Competence of - To assume jurisdiction in a matter - Court must be properly constituted - With subject matter of action within its powers - And action must be initiated by due process of law (H2) Bello v. Damisa (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 391) 4067; (2017) 2 NWLR (PT.1550) 455

COURTS - Confession - Retraction - Trial court rightly skipped the mini trial and admitted Exhibit A in evidence - As the issue of voluntariness of same was not in issue (H3) Egharevba v. State (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 381) 1357; (2016) 8 NWLR (PT.1515) 433

COURTS - Conspiracy - Distinctive nature of - Although appellant was discharged and acquitted of murder - Trial Judge properly inferred conspiracy from facts of the case (H3) Iboji v. State (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 376) 53; (2016) 9 NWLR (PT.1517) 216

COURTS - Conspiracy - Distinctive nature of - Although appellant was discharged and acquitted of murder - Trial Judge properly inferred conspiracy from facts of the case (H3) Ndozie v. State (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 376) 169; (2016) 8 NWLR (PT.1513) 1

COURTS - Contracts - Terms - Binding nature of - Parties are bound by the contract they entered into - And the terms and conditions must be respected by court (H2) Lewis v. UBA Plc. (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 359; (2016) 6 NWLR (PT.1508) 329

COURTS - Conviction - Confession - Court may convict accused on his confessional statement alone - Once the confession is free and voluntary (H1) Asimi v. State (2016) 5 KLR (pt. 386) 2573; (2016) 12 NWLR (PT.1527) 414

COURTS - Conviction - Retracted confession - Court can convict on such confession - Which accused not only resiled from - But also contradicted in his testimony before court (H3) Asimi v. State (2016) 5 KLR (pt. 386) 2573; (2016) 12 NWLR (PT.1527) 414

COURTS - Court of Appeal - Power to make consequential orders, s.15 CA Act - Can be exercised by it as it deems fit - In order to avoid multiplicity of legal proceedings - To give effect and meaning to its judgment (H6) Governor Ekiti State v. Olubunmo (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 392) 4411; (2017) 3 NWLR (PT.1551) 1

COURTS - Criminal trial - Jurisdiction - In determining whether or not it has jurisdiction to try offence - Court will consider the charge vis-à-vis the enabling law (H14) FRN v. Nwosu (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 390) 3709; (2016) 17 NWLR (PT.1541) 226

COURTS - Customary court - Judgment - Validity of - Watch word for appellate court in construing such judgment - Is whether there is substantial justice - And where such exists - There should be no interference (H1) Faleye v. Dada (2016) 4 KLR (pt. 385) 2479; (2016) 15 NWLR (PT.1534) 80

COURTS - Discretion - Trespass - General damages - Presumption of and discretionary award by court - Can only be made where the alleged trespass is proved (H8) Eneh v. Ozor (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 390) 3619; (2016) 16 NWLR (PT.1538) 219

COURTS - Document - Examination of - It is lawful for courts to examine documents - If the resolution of controversy between parties so requires (H3) Ezechukwu v. Onwuka (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 855; (2016) 5 NWLR (PT.1506) 529

COURTS - Documents - Consideration of - While court is bound to consider all relevant and material exhibits - In arriving at its judgment - The same does not apply to every document in its file (H5) Lucky v. State (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 387) 2849; (2016) 13 NWLR (PT.1528) 128

COURTS - Documents - Public document - Admissibility - CA rightly adjudged exhibit C to be a public document - And that there ought to have been a certification - That it was true copy of the original (H2) Onwuzuruike v. Edoziem (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 481; (2016) 6 NWLR (PT.1508) 215

COURTS - Election petition - Tribunal - Justice - Courts are enjoined to do substantial justice - And to refrain from undue technicality - Especially in election petition - Where wider interest is paramount (H13) Ikpeazu v. Otti (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 381) 1377; (2016) 8 NWLR (PT.1513) 38

COURTS - Election petitions - Votes - Accreditation - Proof - Burden of proving non accreditation of votes is on petitioner - Hence CA was wrong to have relied solely on card reader - To nullify appellant's election (H8) Emmanuel v. Umana (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 382) 1631

COURTS - Elections - Annulment of - Fresh election - Where court annuls election and there is need to conduct fresh one - Order for fresh election ought to be made - Whether or not it was asked for (H6) Emerhor v. Okowa (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 382) 1587; (2016) 11 NWLR (PT.1522) 1

COURTS - Elections - Preelection - Jurisdiction - Only aspirants at primaries can complain about the conduct thereof - And jurisdiction in such matters resides not in election tribunal - But in High Courts (H6) Alhassan v. Ishaku (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 381) 1279; (2016) 10 NWLR (PT.1520) 230

COURTS - Evidence - Admissibility - Counsel must object to inadmissible evidence - But where such evidence is admitted - Court must during judgment - Treat same as if it was not admitted (H3) Alhassan v. Ishaku (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 381) 1279; (2016) 10 NWLR (PT.1520) 230

COURTS - Evidence - Admissibility - Court is entitled not to place probative value on evidence - Which does not pass the test of cross examination (H9) Emmanuel v. Umana (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 382) 1631

COURTS - Evidence - Contradiction - Effect - It is not every inconsistency in prosecution's case - That warrants a reversal of the decision of court - As such inconsistency must be material (H4) Abokokuyanro v. State (2016) 3 KLR (pt. 384) 2245; (2016) 9 NWLR (PT.1518) 520

COURTS - Evidence - Evaluation - And ascription of probative value to evidence is duty of trial court - Which watched demeanour of witnesses - And appellate court would not ordinarily interfere (H16) Nyesom v. Peterside (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 380) 1181; (2016) 7 NWLR (PT.1512) 452

COURTS - Evidence - Evaluation - And ascription of weight to evidence is the duty of trial Court - Which heard and observed the demeanour of witnesses - Hence SC and CA do not perform such task (H3) Egharevba v. FRN (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 382) 1543; (2016) 10 NWLR (PT.1521) 431

COURTS - Evidence - Evaluation - Appraisal of evidence based on credibility of witness - Is the exclusive preserve of trial court - Which is out of range for appellate Court (H2) Faleye v. Dada (2016) 4 KLR (pt. 385) 2479; (2016) 15 NWLR (PT.1534) 80

COURTS - Evidence - Evaluation - CA findings that Exhibit M was evaluated along side other pieces of evidence cannot be faulted - As the Exhibit being all appellant is hanging on - Cannot confer possession (H2) Ehwrudje v. Warri Local Govt. (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 382) 1563; (2016) 10 NWLR (PT.1520) 337

COURTS - Evidence - Evaluation - Court being an impartial arbiter - Does not launch investigation to prove the truth of an exhibit - Which prosecution failed to link with its case (H5) Ezeuko v. State (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 380) 1057; (2016) 6 NWLR (PT.1509) 529

COURTS - Evidence - Evaluation - Crime - Where there is uncontradicted evidence - Trial court still has a duty to evaluate it - And be satisfied that it is credible and sufficient to sustain a claim (H2) Ayeni v. State (2016) 3 KLR (pt. 384) 2291; (2016) 12 NWLR (PT.1525) 51

COURTS - Evidence - Evaluation - Trial Court that heard witnesses testify - Is in a better position to evaluate their testimonies and assign probative value thereto (H5) Chitra K. & W. Manu. Co. Ltd. v. Akingbade (2016) 5 KLR (pt. 386) 2637; (2016) 14 NWLR (PT.1533) 487

COURTS - Evidence - Exhibit - Use of - Party who produces exhibit so that court could utilize it - Must not dump it on the court - But must tie it to relevant aspects of his case (H10) Emmanuel v. Umana (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 382) 1631

COURTS - Evidence - Expert witness - Opinion and conclusion of expert proffered in court - Must be supported by scientific analysis - Otherwise his evidence would be worthless (H2) Okereke v. Umahi (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 382) 1801; (2016) 11 NWLR (PT.1524) 438

COURTS - Evidence - Pleadings - Evidence which is at variance with pleaded facts is inadmissible - And ought to be rejected by court (H2) Alhassan v. Ishaku (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 381) 1279; (2016) 10 NWLR (PT.1520) 230

COURTS - Evidence of coaccused - Weight - Where evidence incriminating accused was from a coaccused - Court can rely on it provided accused persons were jointly tried (H5) Asimi v. State (2016) 5 KLR (pt. 386) 2573; (2016) 12 NWLR (PT.1527) 414

COURTS - Federal High Court - Jurisdiction - Expansion of - National Assembly can by the Constitution expand its jurisdiction As it did in preelection matters - Which can be exclusive - Or exercised concurrently with other courts (H4) Garba v. Mohammed (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 388) 2989; (2016) 16 NWLR (PT.1537) 114

COURTS - FHC - Additional jurisdiction - By virtue of Constitution 1999 s. 251(1) - National Assembly may expand jurisdiction of the court - To adjudicate over any matter not listed in s. 251 (H1) Ekagbara v. Ikpeazu (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 378) 565; (2016) 4 NWLR (PT.1503) 411

COURTS - FHC order - Purpose of - The order made by the court was for respondents to appear - And show cause why interim orders of injunction being sought by appellant - Should not be made (H5) Saraki v. FRN (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 382) 1879; (2016) 3 NWLR (PT.1500) 531

COURTS - Finding - Fair hearing - Where Court takes judicial notice of facts - And without allowing party affected - Makes a finding that is unfair to party - The finding will be set aside on appeal (H12) FRN v. Nwosu (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 390) 3709; (2016) 17 NWLR (PT.1541) 226

COURTS - Findings - Binding nature of - The fact that there is no appeal against finding of CA - Means that the finding remains valid and subsisting - And binding on the parties (H2) Chitra K. & W. Manu. Co. Ltd. v. Akingbade (2016) 5 KLR (pt. 386) 2637; (2016) 14 NWLR (PT.1533) 487

COURTS - Findings - Failure to appeal - Finding of court that is not appealed against - Is deemed to have been accepted by the parties (H2) Isiaka v. Amosun (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 380) 1115; (2016) 9 NWLR (PT.1518) 417

COURTS - Findings of - Election petitions - Appeals - Grounds - Allegation of non use of card reader did not arise from any specific ground - Attacking specific finding of the lower courts (H5) Waziri v. Geidam (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 382) 2007; (2016) 11 NWLR (PT.1523) 230

COURTS - High Courts - Coordinate jurisdiction - A court of coordinate jurisdiction cannot sit as appellate court in another case - To review a decision made by another court of the same hierarchy (H2) Cole v. Jibunoh (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 378) 531; (2016) 4 NWLR (PT.1503) 499

COURTS - Inconsistency Rule - Application - It is applied where a witness is unable to explain the inconsistency - Arising from his previous statement and evidence in court (H2) Asimi v. State (2016) 5 KLR (pt. 386) 2573; (2016) 12 NWLR (PT.1527) 414

COURTS - Investigation - Power of EFCC - The order from Abia State HC is interference - To duty of the Commission to investigate and prosecute financial crimes (H4) Kalu v. FRN (2016) 3 KLR (pt. 383) 2147; (2016) 9 NWLR (PT.1516) 1

COURTS - Issue - Failure to raise - Issue of illegality of the Minister's delegate to append signature having not been raised at trial - Will not be allowed on appeal - As doing so will overreach respondents (H4) Bullet Int. Nig. Ltd. v. Olaniyi (2016) 4 KLR (pt. 385) 2455; (2016) 10 NWLR (PT.1521) 580

COURTS - Issue - Suo motu raising - Court is not entitled to raise issue suo motu and decide on it - Without affording parties opportunity to be heard (H2) Egbuchu v. CMB Plc (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 381) 1337; (2016) 8 NWLR (PT.1513) 192

COURTS - Issue - Suo motu raising - Court would not suo motu raise issue - Without giving both sides opportunity to address it on the issue - Otherwise it will amount to denial of fair hearing (H7) Mabamije v. Otto (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 379; (2016) 13 NWLR (Pt.1529) 171

COURTS - Issue - Suo motu raising - Where court raises point suo motu - Parties must be heard on the point - Particularly the party that may suffer punishment as a result of the point (H6) Oguebego v. PDP (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 921; (2016) 4 NWLR (PT.1503) 446

COURTS - Issues - Binding nature of - Court must confine itself to the case presented and issues raised by parties - As it has no business considering issue not properly brought before it (H5) Okafor v. Bende Div. Union (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 393) 4687; (2017) 5 NWLR (PT.1559) 385

COURTS - Issues - Confinement to - Court is bound to confine its decision to issues raised by parties - As it does not have power to go outside such issues - To formulate cases for the parties (H9) Ngere v. Okuruket "XIV" (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 393) 4597; (2017) 5 NWLR (PT.1559) 440

COURTS - Issues - Determination of - Court must resolve all issues submitted to it for adjudication except in clearest cases - As failure to do so would amount to denial of fair hearing (H7) Garba v. Mohammed (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 388) 2989; (2016) 16 NWLR (PT.1537) 114

COURTS - Issues - Fair hearing - A person against whom an issue is raised - Must be heard before the determination of the Court - Upon the issue one way or another (H13) FRN v. Nwosu (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 390) 3709; (2016) 17 NWLR (PT.1541) 226

COURTS - Issues - Suo motu raising - Where Court deems it fit to take a point suo motu - Parties must be given opportunity to address Court - Before a decision on the point is made (H6) Okafor v. Bende Div. Union (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 393) 4687; (2017) 5 NWLR (PT.1559) 385

COURTS - Issues - Suo motu raising of - Court is not entitled to raise issue and decide on it without hearing the parties - Otherwise it would be seen as making case for one of the parties (H1) Mainstreet Bank Ltd. v. Binna (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 381) 1433; (2016) 12 NWLR (PT.1526) 316

COURTS - Judgment - Basis - Court is to ensure that its judgment - Is confined to issues raised by parties - But where it raises question suo motu - Parties must given opportunity to be heard (H4) Emmanuel v. Umana (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 382) 1631

COURTS - Judgment - Issue of law - Decision of Court on an issue as to whether or not action is statute barred - Is a matter of law that has nothing to do with equity (H3) Esuwoye v. Bosere (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 390) 3639; (2017) 1 NWLR (PT.1546) 256

COURTS - Judgments - Basis - Decisions of court proceed not only on the basis of pleaded facts - But also on the basis of facts as established by evidence in that behalf (H1) Isaac v. Imasuen (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 376) 69; (2016) 7 NWLR (PT.1511) 250

COURTS - Judgments - Crime - Writing - Method of - Once the essential elements are present - It will not matter what method was employed in writing the judgment (H8) Ezeuko v. State (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 380) 1057; (2016) 6 NWLR (PT.1509) 529

COURTS - Judgments - Mistake - Effect - It is not every mistake or

failure made by trial court in its findings - That leads to a reversal of its decision on an appeal (H6) Faleye v. Dada (2016) 4 KLR (pt. 385) 2479; (2016) 15 NWLR (PT.1534) 80

COURTS - Judgments - Reversal - Wrongful admission of evidence - Would not by itself be a ground for reversing decision - Where appellate court finds that the evidence did not affect the decision (H3) Itu v. State (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 376) 99; (2016) 5 NWLR (PT.1506) 443

COURTS - Judgments - Writing of - Where a panel of Justices hears a matter - Each of them must express and deliver his opinion in writing - But such opinion may be delivered by any other Justice of the court (H2) Nyesom v. Peterside (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 380) 1181; (2016) 7 NWLR (PT.1512) 452

COURTS - Judicial precedents - Application of - Basis - Although decisions of superior Court are binding on all lower Courts - Yet a decision is authority for what it actually decided - Based on facts and law (H5) Obasi v. Mikson E. Ind. Ltd. (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 389) 3361; (2016) 16 NWLR (PT.1539) 335

COURTS - Judicial precedents - Principle of - Supreme Court and other courts are bound by earlier decisions of the apex court - Where the law and facts in contention are similar (H2) Ogboru v. Okowa (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 382) 1753; (2016) 11 NWLR (PT.1522) 84

COURTS - Judicial precedents - Stare decisis - Application of - Is in respect of where issue determined by court in an earlier case - Is the same to issue the court is subsequently approached to determine (H1) Thomas v. Fed. J.S.C. (2016) 4 KLR (pt. 385) 2549(2016) 11 NWLR (PT.1523) 312

COURTS - Judicial precedents - Stare decisis - Constitution 1999 s. 287 - In the hierarchy of courts - A lower court is bound by the decision of a higher court (H4) Nig. Agip Oil Co. Ltd. v. Nkweke (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 378) 591; (2016) 7 NWLR (PT.1512) 588

COURTS - Jurisdiction - Absence of - Effect - The trial court and Court of Appeal acted in vain - As appellant's complaint governed by

CAMA ss. 262 & 266 - Should have been brought at Federal High Court (H2) Oni v. Cadbury Nig. Plc. (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 461; (2016) 9 NWLR (PT.1516) 80

COURTS - Jurisdiction - Conferment of - Where statute confers jurisdiction on Court - It serves as mandate to Court to adjudicate on matters in issue - Otherwise Court becomes incapacitated (H6) Bello v. Damisa (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 391) 4067; (2017) 2 NWLR (PT.1550) 455

COURTS - Jurisdiction - Consent by parties - Submitting to jurisdiction is no answer to want of jurisdiction of a court - For a total lack of jurisdiction - Cannot be cured by assent of parties (H3) Oni v. Cadbury Nig. Plc. (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 461; (2016) 9 NWLR (PT.1516) 80

COURTS - Jurisdiction - Disciplinary power - Whatever a litigant did during lis pendens - Calculated to over reach his adversary - Would be undone by court in its disciplinary jurisdiction (H1) Kalu v. FRN (2016) 3 KLR (pt. 383) 2147; (2016) 9 NWLR (PT.1516) 1

COURTS - Jurisdiction - Ouster of - Edict No. 7 of 1985 ousted the jurisdiction of the court - Thus the freezing of respondent's account and subsequent transfer of the funds - Are not subject to litigation (H2) Diamond Bank Ltd. v. Ugochukwu (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 382) 1525; (2016) 9 NWLR (PT.1517) 193

COURTS - Miscarriage of justice - Meaning - It means failure on the part of court to do justice - And it arises in a decision that is prejudicial - Or inconsistent with substantial right of party (H1) Itu v. State (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 376) 99; (2016) 5 NWLR (PT.1506) 443

COURTS - Narcotic drugs - Federal High Court and not Magistrate Court is vested with jurisdiction - To entertain the charge bordering on Indian Hemp against appellant (H2) Ochala v. FRN (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 445; (2016) 17 NWLR (Pt.1541) 169

COURTS - No case submission - Issue of whether or not evidence is believed is immaterial at this stage - And all that is required of court is to ascertain if there is evidence linking accused with offence (H1)

Okafor v. State (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 376) 183; (2016) 4 NWLR (PT.1502) 248

COURTS - Orders - Coordinate jurisdiction - Limit - Orders of Abia State HC - Cannot affect proceedings before Federal HC - Because the order is not directed at the said proceedings (H2) Kalu v. FRN (2016) 3 KLR (pt. 383) 2147; (2016) 9 NWLR (PT.1516) 1

COURTS - Orders of - Jurisdiction - Where trial court lacks jurisdiction to entertain a matter - Or to make a particular order - Court of Appeal would equally lack jurisdiction to do so (H3) Egbuchu v. CMB Plc (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 381) 1337; (2016) 8 NWLR (PT.1513) 192

COURTS - Orders of - Nonsuit - Is made where plaintiff has not failed entirely to prove his case - Where defendant is not entitled to court's judgment - Where no injustice to defendant would be caused (H1) Egbuchu v. CMB Plc (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 381) 1337; (2016) 8 NWLR (PT.1513) 192

COURTS - Orders of court - Stay of execution - Application - In the absence of an appeal against the order of trial court - CA could not have entertained application for stay of execution pending appeal (H3) Nig. Agric. Coop. Bank Ltd. v. Ozoemelam (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 407; (2016) 9 NWLR (PT.1517) 376

COURTS - Pleadings - Binding nature of - Pleading conveys the claim of plaintiff to defendant - And parties and courts are bound by pleadings - As no party would be allowed to contend the contrary (H1) Alhassan v. Ishaku (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 381) 1279; (2016) 10 NWLR (PT.1520) 230

COURTS - Proceedings - Judge's chambers -Is not a regular court room with free access to the public - Hence the proceedings in chambers was an incurable irregularity (H1) Alimi v. Kosebinu (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 390) 3539; (2016) 17 NWLR (PT.1542) 337

COURTS - Proceedings - Recording of - Judges should ensure that record leaves no one in doubt as to what really happened - As nothing should be left to speculation (H2) Hassan v. State (2016) 9-12

KLR (pt. 391) 4205; (2017) 5 NWLR (PT.1557) 1

COURTS - Processes - Abuse - Features - Instituting multiple actions by using similar processes in respect of same right - Is abuse of legal process - Which fundamentally attacks jurisdiction of court (H3) Ladoja v. Ajimobi (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 382) 1691; (2016) 10 NWLR (PT.1519) 87

COURTS - Processes - Consideration of - Court can make use of processes filed before it - To arrive at a just decision in a matter pending before it (H11) Salisu v. Mobolaji (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 390) 3793; (2016) 15 NWLR (PT.1535) 242

COURTS - Property law - Relief - Right to - Right to remedy of respondents is not defeated - Merely because they had claimed possession and damages for trespass - As the claims where made in one suit - Is not defeated by their being lumped up (H4) Ehwrudje v. Warri Local Govt. (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 382) 1563; (2016) 10 NWLR (PT.1520) 337

COURTS - Property law - Trespass - Injunction - Stall - Once infringement of right to possession is established - And court makes findings thereof - Remedy of a grant of injunction would naturally follow (H3) Ehwrudje v. Warri Local Govt. (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 382) 1563; (2016) 10 NWLR (PT.1520) 337

COURTS - Rape - Proof - Interjection by court - Answer to the question posed by trial court to PW1 after cross examination - Did not occasion miscarriage of justice - And added no value to prosecution's case (H4) Isa v. Kano State (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 329; (2016) 6 NWLR (PT.1508) 243

COURTS - Reliefs - Grant of - Basis - Entitlement to reliefs from court is if on the basis of the facts adduced - The court thinks that grant of the reliefs is just (H4) Ezechukwu v. Onwuka (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 855; (2016) 5 NWLR (PT.1506) 529

COURTS - Statutes - Interpretation - Purposive approach - Court is to embark upon positive interpretation - Thus a negative interpreta

tion of the law should be avoided - As such is against the canon of interpretation of law (H3) S.P.D.C. of Nig. Ltd. v. Sam Royal Nig. Ltd. (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 381) 1495; (2016) 8 NWLR (PT.1514) 318

COURTS - Summary judgment - Validity of - Court of Appeal rightly agreed that the summary judgment was proper - Since trial Judge found that appellant's affidavit were bereft of material evidence (H3) Lewis v. UBA Plc. (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 377) 359; (2016) 6 NWLR (PT.1508) 329

COURTS -Fundamental rights - Enforcement - Ex parte application - In the absence of respondents' processes - The necessary materials for the invocation of powers of appellate Courts are missing (H2) Benson v. COP (2016) 5 KLR (pt. 386) 2597; (2016) 12 NWLR (PT.1527) 445

CRIMINAL LAW - Conspiracy - Attempted offence - In order to constitute attempt to commit an offence - The act must be immediately connected with commission of the particular offence (H3) Okafor v. State (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 376) 183; (2016) 4 NWLR (PT.1502) 248

CRIMINAL LAW - Conspiracy - Criminal liability - Where several persons are involved in criminal act - In furtherance of a common intention of all of them - Each of them is liable for that act (H4) Asimi v. State (2016) 5 KLR (pt. 386) 2573; (2016) 12 NWLR (PT.1527) 414

CRIMINAL LAW - Conspiracy - Ingredient of - Lies in mere agreement to do an unlawful thing which is contrary to the law - Whether or not accused had knowledge of its unlawfulness (H1) Bouwor v. State (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 775; (2016) 4 NWLR (PT.1502) 295

CRIMINAL LAW - Mens rea - Distinctive nature - Criminal liability in each offence is separate from any other offence - Hence lack of mens rea in one offence cannot defeat mens rea in another (H6) Spies v. Oni (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 388) 3113; (2016) 14 NWLR (PT.1532) 236

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - A-G's fiat - Delegation of - Private legal practitioner may be instructed by Attorney General - To appear in

criminal case on his behalf (H10) FRN v. Nwosu (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 390) 3709; (2016) 17 NWLR (PT.1541) 226

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - A-G's fiat - Duration of - Once fiat is issued - Its validity to prosecute or defend a case - Continues throughout the duration of the case (H9) FRN v. Nwosu (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 390) 3709; (2016) 17 NWLR (PT.1541) 226

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Alibi - Defence - Conditions - Accused must raise alibi at earliest opportunity - Giving particulars of his whereabouts and those with him - As this will enable police to investigate the defence (H3) Adebiyi v. State (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 376) 13; (2016) 8 NWLR (PT.1515) 459

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Alibi - Defence - Conditions - Accused must raise the defence at earliest opportunity - To afford prosecution opportunity to investigate same - Otherwise the defence would be rejected (H4) Udo v. State (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 382) 1971; (2016) 12 NWLR (PT.1525) 1

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Alibi - Defence - Investigation - As respondent failed to investigate the alibi - Appellant must be discharged and acquitted - For his responsibility for the crime has not been proved beyond reasonable doubt (H4) Adebiyi v. State (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 376) 13; (2016) 8 NWLR (PT.1515) 459

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Alibi - Defence - Weight - When properly established - The defence has far reaching effect of exculpating accused - From complete criminal responsibility (H2) Adebiyi v. State (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 376) 13; (2016) 8 NWLR (PT.1515) 459

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Alibi - Test of - Court must test evidence of alibi against evidence led by prosecution in rebuttal - And where it doubts the guilt of accused - Accused must enjoy the benefit of such doubt (H5) Godsgift v. State (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 387) 2797; (2016) 13 NWLR (PT.1530) 444

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Appeals - Provocation - Issue of - The defence cannot avail appellant - As he neither raised it at trial - Nor

sought for leave to raise same on appeal (H1) Abdu v. State (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 391) 3919; (2017) 7 NWLR (PT.1564) 171

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Armed robbery - Conspiracy - Proof - Exhibit B constitutes ingredient of conspiracy - As it expresses common intention of appellant and others - To commit armed robbery (H1) John v. State (2016) 3 KLR (pt. 384) 2313; (2016) 11 NWLR (PT.1523) 191

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Armed robbery - Death sentence - Having found that prosecution proved its case against appellant - The sentence of death is the only option for the trial court (H4) John v. State (2016) 3 KLR (pt. 384) 2313; (2016) 11 NWLR (PT.1523) 191

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Armed robbery - Defence - The defence is not available to appellant - As respondent adduced sufficient evidence to fix appellant at the robbery scene at the material time (H4) Adewunmi v. State (2016) 3 KLR (pt. 384) 2273; (2016) 10 NWLR (PT.1521) 614

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Armed robbery - Ingredient - Proof - Once it is established that the offence took place - The ingredient of the offence to be proved is to show - That accused was the robber or one of the robbers (H5) Olanipekun v. State (2016) 5 KLR (pt. 386) 2683; (2016) 13 NWLR (PT.1528) 100

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Armed robbery - Ingredients - Proof - Prosecution must prove that there was robbery - That the robbery was armed robbery - And that accused was one of the armed robbers (H2) kpo v. State (2016) 3 KLR (pt. 383) 2119; (2016) 10 NWLR (PT.1521) 501

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Armed robbery - Ingredients - Proof - Prosecution must prove that there was a robbery - That the robbery was armed robbery - And that accused person was one of the robbers (H2) Adewunmi v. State (2016) 3 KLR (pt. 384) 2273; (2016) 10 NWLR (PT.1521) 614

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Armed robbery - Ingredients - Proof - Prosecution is bound to prove that there was robbery - That appellant was armed at the time of the robbery - And that appellant participated in the crime (H2) John v. State (2016) 3 KLR (pt. 384) 2313; (2016) 11 NWLR (PT.1523) 191

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Armed robbery - Ingredients - Proof - To secure conviction for the offence - Prosecution must prove that there was robbery - That the robbery was armed robbery - And that accused was the robber (H6) Kayode v. State (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 380) 1139; (2016) 7 NWLR (PT.1511) 199

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Armed robbery - Stolen item - Presumption of guilt - Contained in Evidence Act s. 167(a) is applicable - As appellant failed to give good explanations as to how he came into possession of the items (H3) Ogogovie v. State (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 387) 2887; (2016) 12 NWLR (PT.1527) 468

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Armed robbery trial - Commencement of - Mode as provided by statutes and the Constitution - Is by summary trial procedure - That is by preferring a charge (H2) Maraire v. State (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 392) 4467; (2017) 3 NWLR (PT.1552) 283

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Arraignment - Breach - Allegation of absence of arraignment is an error of law - Which has the effect to render entire proceedings at trial a nullity (H1) Musa2 v. State (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 392) 4527; (2017) 4 NWLR (PT.1555) 187

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Arraignment - Fair hearing - There is no breach of fair hearing against appellant - As he has by admission stated that he was in Court when proceedings were held (H1) Hassan v. State (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 391) 4205; (2017) 5 NWLR (PT.1557) 1

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Charges - Discrepancy in - Failure to mention exhibit B in the charge is not fatal to prosecution's case - As appellant was properly identified as one of the robbers (H3) Friday(1) v. State (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 389) 3277; (2016) 16 NWLR (PT.1538)

205

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Charges - Guilty plea - Effect - Appellant's plea of guilty indicates that he understood the charges - Otherwise he would have objected when the charges were being read to him - And before his plea (H1) Kpoobari v. FRN (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 376) 125; (2016) 13 NWLR (Pt.1528) 81

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Charges - Guilty plea - Tendering of evidence - Once accused pleads guilty - Prosecution can ask for leave to tender exhibits - After summarizing facts of the case - And then urge the Court to convict (H7) Baalo v. FRN (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 387) 2761; (2016) 13 NWLR (PT.1530) 400

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Charges - Interpretation - Arraignment of appellant was properly done - As the charge was explained to him and he understood same - Since neither he nor his counsel raised a complaint (H1) Adewunmi v. State (2016) 3 KLR (pt. 384) 2273; (2016) 10 NWLR (PT.1521) 614

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Charges - Recording of - Omission to expressly record that charge was read over and explained to accused before his plea was taken - Does not render trial a nullity (H5) Okere v. State (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 379) 963

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Confession - Admission - Objection - As Exhibit D was admitted without objection - It is the weight to be attached to it - That will engage the minds of trial court and appellate courts (H3) Olanipekun v. State (2016) 5 KLR (pt. 386) 2683; (2016) 13 NWLR (PT.1528) 100

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Confession - Admission - When confession is admitted without objection from the maker - The law implies that the maker agrees with everything in the statement (H5) Smart v. State (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 378) 651; (2016) 9 NWLR (PT.1518) 447

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Confession - Attestation by superior police officer - The tradition is not part of Judge's rule - But a rule of practice developed by police - To give credence to confessional state

ment of accused (H7) Okashetu v. State (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 388) 3083; (2016) 15 NWLR (PT.1534) 126

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Confession - Contradiction - Where accused gives evidence contrary to his earlier statement to police - Such evidence should be disregarded as unreliable (H3) Isong v. State (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 387) 2827; (2016) 14 NWLR (PT.1531) 96

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Confession - Conviction - Once Court is satisfied that confessional statement is voluntary and true - It is safe to convict on such confession (H13) Hassan v. State (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 391) 4205; (2017) 5 NWLR (PT.1557) 1

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Confession - Conviction - Provided that a confessional statement is direct and voluntary - It is enough to support a conviction (H4) Olanipekun v. State (2016) 5 KLR (pt. 386) 2683; (2016) 13 NWLR (PT.1528) 100

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Confession - Corroboration - Veracity of a confession is tested inter alia - By whether it is possible - And consistent with other established facts (H4) Akinrinlola v. State (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 389) 3239; (2016) 16 NWLR (PT.1537) 73

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Confession - Doctrine of last seen - Where accused was the last person to be seen with deceased - He must explain how the latter met his death - Otherwise he is deemed to be the murderer (H7) Godsgift v. State (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 387) 2797; (2016) 13 NWLR (PT.1530) 444

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Confession - Effect on coaccused - Where accused incriminates coaccused - The statement is evidence only against the accused - And not against coaccused (H9) Hassan v. State (2016) 9-12 KLR (pt. 391) 4205; (2017) 5 NWLR (PT.1557) 1

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Confession - In which appellant stated his share of the armed robbery booty - Is not capable of two interpretations - As alleged by appellant's counsel (H2) Akinrinlola v. State (2016) 7 KLR (pt. 389) 3239; (2016) 16 NWLR (PT.1537) 73

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Confession - Language - Where accused was cautioned in English - And he signed the caution prior to his statement - He cannot later complain that the same was not translated (H4) Asuquo v. State (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 387) 2741; (2016) 14 NWLR (PT.1532) 309

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Confession - Recorded in colloquial English - Statement recorded in pidgin English - Does not require translation into proper English - And can be recorded in proper English (H2) Olanipekun v. State (2016) 5 KLR (pt. 386) 2683; (2016) 13 NWLR (PT.1528) 100

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Confession - Recording of - Statements by accused should be recorded in the language in which they were made - So as to ensure correctness and accuracy of the statements (H1) Olanipekun v. State (2016) 5 KLR (pt. 386) 2683; (2016) 13 NWLR (PT.1528) 100

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Confession - Retraction - Confession does not become inadmissible merely because of retraction by accused - As the retraction will be considered in determining weight to be attached (H3) kpo v. State (2016) 3 KLR (pt. 383) 2119; (2016) 10 NWLR (PT.1521) 501

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Confession - Retraction - Mere denial by accused does not render confession inadmissible - Although court cannot act on confession - Without testing the veracity and correctness of same (H6) Okashetu v. State (2016) 6 KLR (pt. 388) 3083; (2016) 15 NWLR (PT.1534) 126

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Confession - Retraction - Once confession has been proved to be made voluntarily - A conviction is held to be good - Regardless of retraction by accused in court (H2) Smart v. State (2016) 1 KLR (pt. 378) 651; (2016) 9 NWLR (PT.1518) 447

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Confession - Retraction - Trial court rightly skipped the mini trial and admitted Exhibit A in evidence - As the issue of voluntariness of same was not in issue (H3) Egharevba v. State (2016) 2 KLR (pt. 381) 1357; (2016) 8 NWLR (PT.1515) 433