ALHAJI SAIDU BAWA v. ALHAJI ALIYU ARDO JIBBO & ORS

CORAM

PARTIES

ALHAJI SAIDU BAWA

ALHAJI ALIYU ARDO JIBBO

AREA(S) OF LAW

SUMMARY OF FACTS

This application is brought pursuant to Order 6, Rules 1 and 9, Order 8 Rules 1 and 4 of the Rules of this Court and under the inherent jurisdiction of the court for an order granting leave to the Appellant/Applicant to adduce additional evidence in Appeal No. CA/YL/155/19 and to amend the original notice of appeal. The 1st Respondent in opposition to the application, filed a counter affidavit, urging the court to dismiss the Application. The 2nd – 6th Respondents did not oppose the application.

HELD

Application Dismissed

ISSUES

Not Available

RATIONES DECIDENDI

COURT – FACTORS THE COURT WOULD CONSIDER IN THE EXERCISE OF ITS DISCRETION TO GRANT OR REFUSE LEAVE TO ADDUCE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE ON APPEAL

“The principles the court will consider in the exercise of its discretion to grant or refuse leave to adduce or admit additional evidence on appeal include the following:
1. The evidence sought to be adduced must be such as could not have been with reasonable diligence obtained for use at the trial.
2. The evidence sought to be adduced should not be such as if admitted, it would have an important not necessarily crucial effect on the whole case and
3. The evidence must be such as apparently credible in the sense that it is capable of being believed and it need not be incontrovertible.
See Uzodinma V. Izunaso No. 2 (2011) 17 NWLR (Pt. 1275) 30 at 106. At page 55 Rhodes – Vivour JSC had earlier stated as follows:
“The discretion to grant leave to admit new evidence is properly exercised if it is for the furtherance of justice. Judges must exercise that power sparingly and with caution. This is so because granting the application could amount to allowing the applicant to reopen his case or present a new case. The application should be granted if the applicant is able to satisfy the court that it was extremely difficult or not possible to obtain the evidence before trial and it is in the interest of justice that the said evidence be led.”
–