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

EXPERT IS PERMITTED TO GIVE AN OPINION BASED ON HEARSAY

Para. 40: “It is common knowledge that an expert’s opinion is usually based on his training and experience. In law an expert is permitted to give an opinion on the basis of hearsay information, provided that it relates to specific matters of which he does have personal knowledge. Thus a doctor can give evidence of what he was told by a patient about his condition for the purpose of evaluating his diagnosis; though his testimony is inadmissible to show what symptoms were actually being experienced by the patient; see R. V. Bradshaw (1985) 82 Cr. App. R. 79, CA.”

— Saidykhan v GAMBIA (2010) – ECW/CCJ/JUD/08/10

Was this dictum helpful?

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

IT IS NOT IN EVERY CASE THAT A MEDICAL DOCTOR MUST BE CALLED

A lot of heavy weather has been made about the failure of the prosecution to call the medical doctor to testify in this case. First of all, it must be stated, that it is not in every case that the medical doctor must be called to testify. By virtue of Section 55 (1) of the...

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here

NON PRODUCTION OF QUALIFICATION OF EXPERTISE GOES TO WEIGHT NOT ADMISSIBILITY

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?

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

WHERE PARTY BRINGS EXPERT WITNESS – WEIGHT OF TESTIMONY

Reach more audience. Place advert here.

Was this dictum helpful?

EXPERT EVIDENCE OVER WEIGHS PRESUMPTION

Membership Required

EXPERT IS PERMITTED TO GIVE AN OPINION BASED ON HEARSAY

Was this dictum helpful?

OPINIONS OF HANDWRITING EXPERTS ARE ADMISSIBLE TO DECIPHER WORDS

Membership Required

IT IS NOT IN EVERY CASE THAT A MEDICAL DOCTOR MUST BE CALLED

Membership Required

NON PRODUCTION OF QUALIFICATION OF EXPERTISE GOES TO WEIGHT NOT ADMISSIBILITY

Was this dictum helpful?

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

Membership Required