In line with the trite position of law as restated by the Supreme Court in FIRST BANK v T.S.A. INDUSTRIES LTD (2010) LPELR-1283(SC) at page 13, paras. B E, I shall first consider and determine the Respondents’ objections to the competence of the Petition and the Petitioners’ Replies, or the listed paragraphs thereof, before determining the main Petition.
— H.S. Tsammani, JCA. Peter Obi & Anor. v INEC & Ors. (2023) – CA/PEPC/03/2023
SHARE ON
A counsel has to take a definite stand. He cannot sit on the fence as the law does not permit such a thing. He must make his view known before the case is fixed for judgment. What is open to a counsel when a document is tendered by the other party is to raise an objection if he opposes the admissibility of the document and if he has no objection he should say so. It will then be for the court, if there is an objection to the admissibility of the document, to give a ruling. If the objection is upheld the document should be rejected and marked, ”rejected”. It should not be marked as an exhibit, and, while it remains rejected, the document is irrelevant and its contents cannot be used for the determination of any issue in the case by either the trial court or by an appellate court.
– Adio, JSC. UBN v. Ozigi (1994)
For the umpteenth time, the essence of a preliminary objection is to terminate an appeal in limine. Any objection to a ground or some grounds of appeal, not the entire appeal, is by way of motion on notice which could be argued in the brief vide Okereke v. James (2012) 16 NWLR (Pt. 1326) 339 at 348- 349.
– A. Aboki, JSC. Sani v. Kogi State (2021) – SC.1179/2019
It is also the law, in the latter case, where a party fails to object to the admission of inadmissible evidence, at the trial, he cannot be allowed to raise an objection at the appeal stage unless the evidence was absolutely legally inadmissible, see Igbodim v Obianke (supra).
— Musdapher, JSC. Shittu & Ors. v Fashawe [2005] – SC 21/2001
The 2nd Defendants short of their arguing that these exhibits were wrongly admitted and that the court had power to expunge wrongly admitted evidence the Defendants did not advance any reason for their objection. This objection is therefore considered abandoned.
— E.N. Agbakoba, J. Igenoza v Unknown Defendant (2019) – NICN/ABJ/294/2014
The appropriate time for the Appellant, through his Counsel, to raise objection to the admissibility of Exhibit A, either on the ground of Illiterates (Protection) Law or on the ground of the Appellant’s inability to understand, speak or understand English Language was at the time the prosecutor sought to tender Exhibit A as evidence. The Appellant herein, having lost the vital moment to raise his preliminary objection to Exhibit A at the trial Court, is deemed not to have any objection, a fact made expressly by his counsel, to the admissibility of Exhibit A.
– Sanusi, JSC. Umaru Sunday v. FRN (2018) – SC.145/2013
Even if it can be argued, though wrongly, that the suit ought to have been commenced by means of a judicial review, the Appellants did not raise this at the earliest opportunity at the trial Court. In other words, where an action is commenced by an irregular mode, it is trite law, that a party who took active part in the proceeding without raising a formal complaint or objection to it, cannot later, be heard to complain and pray for the action to be set aside.
– Yahaya, JCA. Petroleum Resources v. SPDC (2021)
Click the icons to like, follow, and join JPoetry