ONUS IS ON THE OTHER PARTY TO REBUT PRESUMPTION OF THE LAW

When a rebuttable presumption of law exists in favour of a party, the onus is on the other side to rebut it. When any fact is especially within the knowledge of a defendant and upon which he would want to rely, the burden of proving it is on him.

— Muhammad JSC. Nnaemeka Okoye & Ors. v. Ogugua Nwankwo (SC. 234/2004, 27 Jun 2014)

Was this dictum helpful?

THE LAW PRESUMES THAT A MAN INTENDS THE NATURAL CONSEQUENCE OF HIS ACT

This Court still invoked the natural consequence test. According to Katsina-Alu, JSC (as he then was), the law presumes that a man intends the natural and probable consequences of his acts. And the test to be applied in these circumstances is the objective test, namely the test of what a reasonable man would contemplate as the probable result of his acts. See Adamu Garba v. State [1997] 3 SCNJ 68.

— C.C. Nweze JSC. Amaechi Njoku v. The State (SC.424/2017 · 15 JAN 2021)

Was this dictum helpful?

COURT DOES NOT ACT ON PRESUMPTION

It is very elementary that no court acts on presumption. It acts on hard facts.

– Amaizu, J.C.A. Adeniran v. Olagunju (2001)

Was this dictum helpful?

PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE

The law has crystalized in our criminal jurisprudence that an accused person is presumed innocent until he or she is proved guilty. The prosecution is saddled with the burden of proving the guilt of the accused person and the standard of such proof in criminal cases or trial is proof beyond reasonable doubt.

– Adamu Jauro, JSC. Enabeli v. State (2021)

Was this dictum helpful?

GENERAL DAMAGES ARE PRESUMED BY THE LAW

General damages are what the law presumes, but they must flow from the type of wrong complained about by the plaintiff and they frequently result from the tort for which the plaintiff has sued. They are at large in that the quantum of general damages need not be pleaded and proved as they are supposed to be a compensation for the loss or inconvenience flowing naturally from the wrong. They are thus not quantifiable but assessable by the trial Court taking the relevant matters into consideration.

– Yahaya, JCA. MTN v. Ezugwu (2018)

Was this dictum helpful?

THERE IS A PRESUMPTION OF REGULARITY OF OFFICIAL ACTS

If there was any short coming in the Exhibit F, that made it to fail to comply with the adoption laws of Eastern Nigeria, as alleged by the Appellants, that cannot, in my opinion, be the fault of the Respondent or his adoptors, Aduba and his wife, and would not discount from the presumption of its regularity as official Government instrument, authorizing the acceptance and adoption of the Respondent into the home of Mr. and Mrs. Aduba Nwaemere as a member of their family. In the eye of the law, the presumption of regularity of official act remains strong (See section 168 of the Evidence Act 2011), and so is Exhibit F presumed in favour of the Respondent. Again, equity looks as done, that which ought to be done.

– Mbaba JCA. Aduba v. Aduba (2018)

EVERYTHING IS PRESUMED TO BE RIGHTLY PERFORMED

Reach more audience. Place advert here.

Was this dictum helpful?

ONUS IS ON THE OTHER PARTY TO REBUT PRESUMPTION OF THE LAW

Was this dictum helpful?

THE LAW PRESUMES THAT A MAN INTENDS THE NATURAL CONSEQUENCE OF HIS ACT

Was this dictum helpful?

COURT DOES NOT ACT ON PRESUMPTION

Was this dictum helpful?

PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE

Was this dictum helpful?

GENERAL DAMAGES ARE PRESUMED BY THE LAW

Was this dictum helpful?

THERE IS A PRESUMPTION OF REGULARITY OF OFFICIAL ACTS

Was this dictum helpful?