LAWRENCE SCOTT-EMUAKPOR VS J.I. UKAVBE
August 8, 2025AYEMERE IHIMIRE VS THE STATE
August 8, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (1975) Legalpedia (SC) 21170
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria
Fri Dec 5, 1975
Suit Number: SC. 41/1974
CORAM
OGUNDARE, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
MOHAMMED BELLO, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
ANIAGOLU JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
CHIEF OKIRINTA UGBALA B.O. NWAIGWE OKOLI CHUKWUNEKE OKONKWO OBIAGWU APPELLANTS
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The plaintiffs (appellants) claimed against the defendants (respondents) jointly, severally, and in alternative, declaration of title to a piece of land called Okwunta. They also asked for an injunction restraining the defendants, their servants and agents from further acts of trespass in the said land. Their claims were dismissed. They appealed and complained about the use which the learned trial Judge made 1st plaintiffs evidence.
HELD
The Supreme Court held that even if the evidence complained of is expunged from the record the learned trial Judge could have come to any other conclusion that would have affected the result of the case.
ISSUES
Whether, if the evidence given by the 1st plaintiff under cross-examination is expunged from the record of the present case, the learned trial Judge would still have come to the same conclusion
RATIONES DECIDENDI
GROUND FOR ALLOWING AN APPEAL
“Generally, the mere admission of incompetent evidence, not essential to the result, is not a ground for allowing an appeal. The dominant question, we think, is the broad one of whether substantial justice had been done.” Per FATAYI-WILLIAMS, JSC
CASES CITED
STATUTES REFERRED TO
Evidence Law of the East-Central State
