IN RE: CHIEF M. A. OKUPE V. FEDERAL BOARD OF INLAND REVENUE
August 12, 2025YISAWU SHOSIMBO V. THE STATE
August 12, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (1974-04) Legalpedia (SC) 39410
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria
Thu Apr 11, 1974
Suit Number: SC. 86/1973
CORAM
ADIO JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
EMANUEL OBIOMA OGWUEGBU, JSC. JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT (Read the Leading Judgment)
DANIEL O. IBEKWE, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
COMFORT ASABORO
APPELLANTS
M.G.D. ARUWAJI
H. O. THOMAS
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
LAW OF EVIDENCE- ORDER VII RULES 24 OF SUPREME COURT
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The defendants sought an order for leave of the court to adduce new evidence because the Registry of Companies in Lagos was not open to the public at the time of the trial due to internal re-organisation and the document needed for evidence can only be obtained from the Registry.
HELD
The Supreme Court held that it was based on the evidence available that the trial court gave Judgment so the order was granted.
ISSUES
Whether or not in the Circumstances the evidence is such as with reasonable diligence it could have obtained and produced at the trial and whether the privilege which the rule confers enures to a party who did not call any evidence at the trial.
RATIONES DECIDENDI
MATTERS WHICH THE COURTS WILL TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION TO GRANT LEAVE TO ADDUCE NEW EVIDENCE
” A party may by leave of the court allege any facts essential to the issue that have come to his knowledge after the decision of the court below and adduce evidence in support of such allegations – Per Coker, JSC.
MATTERS WHICH THE COURTS WILL TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION TO GRANT LEAVE TO ADDUCE NEW EVIDENCE
“The evidence sought to be adduced must be such as could not have been with reasonable diligence obtained for use at the trial. The evidence should be such as if admitted, it would have an important, not necessarily crucial, effect on the whole case, and the evidence must be such as apparently creditable in the sense that it is capable of being believed and it need not be incontrovertible. – Per Coker, JSC
CASES CITED
Attorney-General of the Federation v. Mallam Modi Alkali (1972) 12 S.C. 29
STATUTES REFERRED TO
ORDER VII RULE 24, RULES OF SUPREME COURT
