PRINCIPLES TO GUIDE WHETHER NEW EVIDENCE SHOULD BE ALLOWED

In Comfort Asaboro v. M.G.D. Aruwaji and Anor. (1974) 4 SC 87 at 90-91 (Reprint) this court had cause to consider the principles which are to be taken into consideration in an application to call additional evidence on appeal. The court per Coker JSC said:- “The decision also evidently applied the principles which time honoured...

This content is for PAYMENT - 1-DAY and PAYMENT - 1-MONTH members only.
Login Join Now

WHEN TESTIMONY OF WITNESS IS EXAGGERATED

To my mind, when the testimony of a witness has reached or attained the height of insipid or impotent exaggerations it should be disregarded as mere petulance and treated with ignominy. – Pats-Acholonu, JSC. C & C Constr. v. Okhai (2003) – SC.8/1999 Was this dictum helpful? Yes 0 No 0...

This content is for PAYMENT - 1-DAY and PAYMENT - 1-MONTH members only.
Login Join Now

APPEAL COURT: WHERE FURTHER EVIDENCE WILL BE NECESSARY

A situation where further evidence will be necessary arises only when the evidence relevant to the issue in controversy to determine an issue and ensure substantial justice is absent and deplete from the proceedings. This court or the court below does not ordinarily go out of its way to fish for evidence to fill a...

This content is for PAYMENT - 1-DAY and PAYMENT - 1-MONTH members only.
Login Join Now

EVIDENCE IN EARLIER PROCEEDING NOT RELEVANT IN LATER TRIAL

Now it is settled law that the evidence of a witness taken in an earlier proceeding is not relevant in a later trial. except for the purpose of discrediting such a witness in cross-examination and for that purpose only. – Kawu, JSC. Ogunnaike v. Ojayemi (1987) Was this dictum helpful? Yes 0 No 0...

This content is for PAYMENT - 1-DAY and PAYMENT - 1-MONTH members only.
Login Join Now

EVIDENCE BY WITNESS IN PREVIOUS PROCEEDINGS CANNOT BE USED IN LATER PROCEEDING

It is settled law that evidence given in a previous case cannot be accepted as evidence in a subsequent proceedings except in conditions where the provisions of section 34(1) of the Evidence Act applies. Even where a witness who testified in a previous proceeding testifies again in a subsequent proceeding, the previous evidence has no...

This content is for PAYMENT - 1-DAY and PAYMENT - 1-MONTH members only.
Login Join Now

PLAINTIFF MUST RELY ON THE STRENGTH OF HIS CASE

In Ngene v. Igbo (2000) 4 NWLR (Pt. 651) 131 at 142, this Court, per Ogundare, JSC said: “A long line of cases beginning with Kodilinye v. Mbanefo Odu (1935) 2 W.A.C.A. 336 has laid it down that in a claim for declaration of title the onus is on the plaintiff to prove his case....

This content is for PAYMENT - 1-DAY and PAYMENT - 1-MONTH members only.
Login Join Now

ANY AGENT OF THE COMPANY CAN GIVE EVIDENCE FOR THE COMPANY

Reach more audience. Place advert here.

Was this dictum helpful?

PRINCIPLES TO GUIDE WHETHER NEW EVIDENCE SHOULD BE ALLOWED

WHEN TESTIMONY OF WITNESS IS EXAGGERATED

APPEAL COURT: WHERE FURTHER EVIDENCE WILL BE NECESSARY

EVIDENCE IN EARLIER PROCEEDING NOT RELEVANT IN LATER TRIAL

EVIDENCE BY WITNESS IN PREVIOUS PROCEEDINGS CANNOT BE USED IN LATER PROCEEDING

PLAINTIFF MUST RELY ON THE STRENGTH OF HIS CASE