CORAM

---

UTHMAN MOHAMMED , JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

IBRAHIM T. MUHAMMA, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT

SAIFULLAH M.MUNTAKA-COOMASSIE, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT

MITCHELL CHRISTOPHER CHUKWUMA-ENEH JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

---

PARTIES

---

1. CHIEF GORDON JOE YOUNG JACK2. FORSBURY S. CLARK GEORGEWILL3. ENGAR REUBEN JACK (DECEASED)(For themselves and as representing the standfast JACK house of Abonnema popularly known as The Iju/Jack group of houses.) . APPELLANTS

---

RESPONDENTS

---

AREA(S) OF LAW

---

---

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The appellant sought inter alia an order of the trial court recognizing the Steadfast Jack stool as the main or paramount stool in Abonnema. That they were entitled to be recognized as such and the respondents are not entitled to the stool. The Claim by the respondents was that the Steadfast Jack family was a component under the Iju/Jack House and under Kalabari Native law and custom. The trial court found for the appellant but the judgment was reversed on appeal to the court of Appeal.

---

HELD

---

In upholding the decision of the court of Appeal and resolving all issues raised against the appellant, the Supreme Court held as follows:1. In respect of issue I, that the representative capacity in which both parties sued was not in doubt. It held the ruling on the subject by the lower court (i.e. Court of Appeal)as an obiter and not appealable.2. In answering Issues 2,3 and 4 the Court held that the evidence on record justifies the holding of the lower court as the appellants’ case only strengthens the case of  the defendants and in some noted material contradictions in therein. Applying the principle that he who asserts must prove, it found the defence of defendants/respondents plausible and so upheld.

---

ISSUES

---

The appellant sought inter alia an order of the trial court recognizing the Steadfast Jack stool as the main or paramount stool in Abonnema. That they were entitled to be recognized as such and the respondents are not entitled to the stool. The Claim by the respondents was that the Steadfast Jack family was a component under the Iju/Jack House and under Kalabari Native law and custom. The trial court found for the appellant but the judgment was reversed on appeal to the court of Appeal.

---

RATIONES DECIDENDI

---

ADMISSIBILITY OF ORAL EVIDENCE

---

“Oral evidence is admissible where it will throw upon or assist the court in determining the probative value to be attached to a document”. {Per U. MOHAMMED, JSC}

---

CASES CITED

---

1. Wiri and Ors. v. Wuche and Ors. (1980) 1-2 S.C 12.2. Bulai v. Omoyajowo (1968) 1 AII NLR 723. A-G Oyo State & 10 ors. v. Fairlakes Hotels Ltd. & I Or. (1989) 5 NWLR (Pt. 121) 255

---

STATUTES REFERRED TO

---

NONE

---

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT