Judiciary-Poetry-Logo
JPoetry

NON PRODUCTION OF QUALIFICATION OF EXPERTISE GOES TO WEIGHT NOT ADMISSIBILITY

Reach more audience. Place advert here.

Dictum

It is the considered view of this tribunal, that the contention of learned counsel to the 2 nd Respondent, that Pw32, did not produce before the tribunal, his qualification or certificate, to satisfy the tribunal of his qualification as an expert witness pursuant to S68 of the Evidence Act 2011 does not go to the admissibility of the report Exhibit P169, but to the weight to be attached to the report, if the court finds so.

— A. Osadebay, J. APC v INEC & Ors. (EPT/KN/GOV/01/2023, 20th Day of September, 2023)

Was this dictum helpful?

SHARE ON

TO QUALIFY AS AN EXPERT UNDER THE EVIDENCE ACT

To qualify as an expert under the Act the witness must be specially skilled in the field in which he is giving evidence and whether or not a witness can be regarded as an expert is a question for the Judge to decide; the decision must be based on legal evidence before him. As Sir...

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here

OPINIONS OF HANDWRITING EXPERTS ARE ADMISSIBLE TO DECIPHER WORDS

While considering the provisions of S.107(1) Evidence Act the Court of Appeal in D.T.B. vs. Awanzigana Enterprises supra also had this to say:- “Moreover the opinions of handwriting experts are admissible to deciper words beneath obliterations erasures, or alterations, although it is for the court to determine what the words are. Experts may also give...

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here

EXPERT EVIDENCE OVER WEIGHS PRESUMPTION

It is, therefore, a negation of duty to run away from expert evidence and postulate presumptions. Presumptions do not arise where direct evidence is available. — Obaseki Ag JSC. Seismograph v. Ogbeni (1976) – SC.39/1974 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

WHERE PARTY BRINGS EXPERT WITNESS – WEIGHT OF TESTIMONY

In Fajemi v. Oni (2009) 7 NWLR (Pt. 1140) 223 @ pp. 276 – 277, it was emphatically held inter alia thus: “The Court must be weary of admitting a report prepared by an Expert not at the instance of the Court but at the behest of any of the parties to the dispute. Such a report must be taken with a pinch of salt.”

Was this dictum helpful?

STATEMENT MADE BY A PERSON INTERESTED AT A TIME – EXPERT STATEMENT

In other words by virtue of section 91(3) of the Evidence Act Cap 112 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 1990, any statement made by a person interested at a time when proceedings were pending or anticipated involving a dispute as to any fact which the statement might tend to establish is inadmissible. See Salako...

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here
Load More
No more related dictum to show.

Click the icons to like, follow, and join JPoetry

Facebook Twitter Whatsapp Telegram

Humongouz Empire

© 2025

designed by Humongouz Ztudio. 

TO – 2157 | UO – 1 | GO – 1934 | BO – 222

External link(s)

BOOK: First 2-years as a Law Student: Experiences and Lessons.