SENATOR RASHIDI ADEWOLU LADOJA V INDEPENDENT NATIONAL ELECTORAL COMMISSION
June 2, 2025ASSOCIATED DISCOUNT HOUSE LIMITED V AMALGAMATED TRUSTEES LIMITED
June 2, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (2007) Legalpedia (SC) 16131
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria
Fri Jul 13, 2007
Suit Number: SC. 364/2002
CORAM
KUMAI BAYANG AKA’AHS
NIKI TOBI CHIEF, JUSTICE, NIGERIA
PARTIES
1.CHIEF SUNDAY OGUNYADE2. SOLOMON OLUYEMI OSHUNKEYE. APPELLANTS
SOLOMON OLUYEMI OSHUNKEYE & ANOR
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The plaintiffs/respondents in this case took out an action against the Defendant/Appellants in the Lagos State High Court claiming N50, 000 for damages for trespass and perpetual injunction. ?
HELD
APPEAL DISMISSED ?
ISSUES
1. Whether the Court of Appeal was not in error in affirming the decision of the trial court which awarded the Plaintiffs/Respondents reliefs differently couched from those formulated on the Amended Statement of Claim.2. Whether the Court of Appeal was not in error in affirming the judgment of the trial court in its findings relating to the joinder of different cause of action by the plaintiffs and the non-production of the originals of conveyances, particularly, Exhibits A, B, D, E & F3. Whether the Court of Appeal was not in error in affirming the judgment of the trial court, when plaintiffs did not prove acts of trespass against the defendant/appellant.?
RATIONES DECIDENDI
A PLAINTIFF MUST SUCCEED ON THE STRENGTH OF HIS CASE AND NOT ON THE WEAKNESS OF THE CASE OF THE DEFENCE – EVEN WHERE DEFENCE DOES NOT GIVE EVIDENCE
“Failure on the part of a defendant to give evidence does not automatically mean that judgment must be given in favour of a plaintiff, who has a duty to prove his case. Where a plaintiff fails to prove his case on the balance of probability or on preponderance of evidence, his case will be thrown out, notwithstanding the fact that the defendant did not give any evidence. That is the basis of the principle of law that a plaintiff cannot rely on the weakness of the case of the defendant” PER ONNOGHEN, J.S.C
THE COURT HAS A RIGHT TO ACT ON UNCHALLENGED EVIDENCE PRESENTED TO IT
“The Court has a right to act on unchallenged evidence presented to it – The law in my view is settled that where evidence given by a party to any proceedings was not challenged by the opposite party who had the opportunity to do so, it is always open to the court seized of the proceedings to act on the unchallenged evidence before it” PER ONNOGHEN, J.S.C
A JUDGMENT SHOULD CONSIDER ALL THE ISSUES RAISED FOR A DECISION AND MAKE FINDINGS THAT FLOW FROM THE FACTS PLEADED AND PROVED
“Now, it is settled law that a judgment of court must demonstrate in full a dispassionate consideration of all the issues properly raised and heard and must reflect on the result of such exercise. In other words, it must show a clear resolution of all the issues that arise for decision in the case and end up with an ultimate verdict which flows logically from the facts as pleaded and found proved” PER ONNOGHEN, J.S.C
A COURT SHOULD NOT AWARD MORE THAN WHAT THE PARTIES CLAIM
“While a court may in a proper case award less than is claimed, the court cannot and should not award more than the claim in the pleadings” PER ONNOGHEN, J.S.C
A JUDGMENT TO BE VALID MUST BE BASED AND CONFINED TO ISSUES JOINED ON PLEADINGS
“A judgment of court must be based and confined to the issues joined by the parties in their pleadings. A judgment unrelated to the relief sought or the issues joined of a claim tried on pleadings cannot be sustained” PER ONNOGHEN, J.S.C
CONCURRENT FINDINGS OF FACT WHICH IS SUPPORTED BY EVIDENCE, IS NOT PERVERSE AND HAS NOT OCCASIONED A MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE WILL NOT BE DISTURBED
“This is an appeal on concurrent findings of facts, which this court cannot disturb, for the settled law is that an appellate court will not interfere with concurrent findings of fact which are supported by credible and relevant evidence, which are not perverse, and have not led to miscarriage of justice” PER ONNOGHEN, J.S.C
A VALID APPEAL MUST BE AGAINST THE DECISION OF THE COURT – ISSUES FOR DETERMINATION TO BE COMPETENT HAVE TO RELATE TO A GROUND OF APPEAL
“It is not every observation and passing remark of the court below that is appealable; to be appealable a complaint must be related to the decision appealed against. Where an issue for determination does not relate to any ground of appeal, this court has no option other than to discountenance it as it is incompetent” PER ONNOGHEN, J.S.C
A COURT MAY GRANT TO A PARTY A RELIEF WHICH HE IS ENTITLED TO IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE EVEN THOUGH NOT SPECIFICALLY CLAIMED
“While it is my view that a court should not generally grant to a party a relief not claimed by that party, there is nothing wrong in a court, in the exercise of its inherent power, to grant to a party a relief which, in the circumstances of the case that is entitled to” PER ONNOGHEN, J.S.C
CERTIFIED TRUE COPY OF A REGISTERED DEED OF CONVEYANCE IS SUFFICIENT PROOF OF EXECUTION OF SAME
“It is settled law that where a certified true copy of a registered Deed of Conveyance, as in the instant case, is properly received in evidence, this will be sufficient for the proof of execution of such Deed of Conveyance” PER ONNOGHEN, J.S.C
APPELLANT SHOULD AVOID PROLIFERATION OF ISSUES WHICH ARE NOT RELEVANT BEFORE THE COURT
“It is elementary law that an appellant does not win an appeal by the quantity of issues but by their quality. While an appellant can win an appeal by a properly formulated single issue for determination, the appeal could fail even if the issues are many, such as the four packaged by the appellant” PER ONNOGHEN, J.S.C
WHERE A RELIEF CLAIMED IS INCOMPLETE ON THE FACE OF THE WRIT THE COURT HAS A RIGHT TO COMPLETE SAME FROM THE EVIDENCE AND PLEADINGS BEFORE IT
” As a sentence cannot end with “and”, it created a sudden blank or void in the relief sought in the Amended Statement of Claim which needed addition for purposes of completion. The role of the court is to do substantial justice and not technical justice. It is justice in its reality or personification and not a caricature of it. As it is, the appellant needs technical justice. It is not available to him. The issue therefore fails” ” PER ONNOGHEN, J.S.C
CASES CITED
Cardozo v. DanielAdelaja v. FanoikiNtukidem v. OkoUniversity of Lagos v. AigoroWoluchem v. GudiOdulaja v. HaddadNigerian Maritime Services Ltd v. Alhaji Bello AfolabiNfor v. Ashaka Cement Co. Ltd.Scoa Motors v. AbumchukwuKalio v. Daniel KalioEbosie v. PhllebosieIncar Nig Ltd v. Benson Transport Ltd; Metal Construction (W.A.) Ltd & 2 Ors. v. Migliore & AnorOjogboe & Anor. v. Nnubia & Others?
STATUTES REFERRED TO
None.
