STOP SEEING INTRUSIVE ADS, & HAVE PREMIUM FEATURES? Stop seeing intrusive ads and have a smoother reading experience, once you sign up on Judicial Poetry. Sign up now!

EVIDENCE NOT CHALLENGED OR CONTRADICTED MUST BE ACCEPTED AS THE CORRECT VERSION

Reach more audience. Place advert here.

Saipem SPA vs. India Tefa (2001) FWLR (pt 74) 377 @p. 394, where this Court had held firmly inter alia, “When evidence of a witness has not been challenged, contradicted or shaken under cross-examination and such evidence is not inadmissible in law, provided the evidence is in line with the facts so pleaded, the evidence must be accepted as the correct version of what was expected to be proved. The Court is not only entitled to but also has no reason not to accept it.”

Was this dictum helpful?

SHARE ON

evidence

WHERE ORAL EVIDENCE IN PRIOR TRIAL MAY BE USED

Ariku v. Ajiwogbo (1962) All NLR (Pt. 4) 630, Ademola CJF (of blessed memory) delivering the judgment of the Supreme Court stated the law as follows:- “This court has frequently directed attention to the practice, now not uncommon of making use of evidence of a witness in another case as if it were evidence in...

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here

PARTIES BOUND BY PLEADINGS – EVIDENCE NOT PLEADED

It is elementary law that parties are bound by their pleadings and facts not pleaded will go to no issue. In other words, evidence on facts not pleaded will not avail the party relying on the evidence. – Niki Tobi JSC. Okonkwo v. Cooperative Bank (2003) Was this dictum helpful? Yes 1 No 0...

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here

EVERY RELEVANT EVIDENCE IS ADMISSIBLE

Once a piece of evidence is relevant, it is admissible in evidence irrespective of how it was obtained. – M.L. Garba JCA. Odogwu v. Vivian (2009) – CA/PH/345/05 Was this dictum helpful? Yes 0 No 0...

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here

NOT FUNCTION OF THE COURT TO SUPPLY OMISSION

The main thrust of the appeal appears to be that if the original of the public document is lost or destroyed thereby rendering the making of a certified copy impracticable, it would be unjust not to admit other form of secondary evidence such as a photocopy of the original document. I share the plight of...

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here

ADMISSION OF FRESH EVIDENCE ON APPEAL MUST BE BY CAUTION

The power to admit new, fresh or additional evidence must always be exercised sparingly and with caution. The Court must consider whether there are special circumstances to warrant the grant of the application and whether it would be in furtherance of the justice of the case. See: Uzodinma vs Izunaso (No.2) (2011) 17 NWLR (Pt....

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here

AVERMENTS IN PLEADINGS VERSUS AVERMENTS IN AFFIDAVIT; ADDRESS OF COUNSEL NOT EVIDENCE

Averments of facts in pleadings must however be distinguished from facts deposed to in an affidavit in support of an application before a court. Whereas the former, unless admitted, constitute no evidence, the latter are by law evidence upon which a court of law may in appropriate cases act. The Court of Appeal, if I...

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here

No more related dictum to show.