CORAM
A.G. KARIBI-WHYTE, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
E.O. OGWUEGBU, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
U. MOHAMMED, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
A. KASTINA-ALU, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
S.O. UWAIFO, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
DENNIS IVIENAGBOR
APPELLANTS
1. HENRY OSATO BAZUAYE
2. MADAM AMIUKPOMAKO OGIEMWENSE
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
LAND LAW-INJUNCTION-DAMAGES-POSSESORY TITLE
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The appellant had sought from the trial court an order of perpetual injunction restraining the respondent from encroaching on his alleged piece of land, special and general damages for trespass and a declaration that he is entitled to possesory title
HELD
The court held that it cannot see in what way the appellant has made out a case against the judgments of the two courts below without indulging in the realm of speculation. I have therefore come to the conclusion that there is no justifiable cause for me to interfere with the findings made by the two lower courts.
ISSUES
(i) Whether or not the respondents are entitled to the declaration they sought.
(ii) Whether or not the appellant is entitled to a possessory title in respect of the land in question
(iii) Whether or not the appellant is entitled to damages for trespass.
RATIONES DECIDENDI
UNCONTRADICTED/UNCHALLENGED EVIDENCE-HOW TREATED
‘…evidence which is unchallenged through cross-examination, not controverted by other evidence and is not by itself incredible is qualified to be accepted and acted upon by the trial court’- Uwaifo, J.S.C
ON ATTITUDE OF THE COURT TOWARDS CONCURRENT FINDINGS OF THE LOWER COURTS
‘It has been established to be the policy of this court that it will not disturb concurrent findings of fact by the two lower courts except in special circumstances such as the commission of error in substantive or procedural law or where the findings are shown to be perverse’: – Uwaifo, J.S.C
EVIDENCE A COURT WILL ACT ON
‘The type of evidence a court can act on is the evidence which was exposed and canvassed in court. A judge cannot by examining documents outside court act on what he considers he has discovered on an issue when that was not supported by evidence or was not brought to the notice of the parties to be agitated in the usual adversarial procedure’.- Uwaifo, J.S.C
DUTY OF COURT IN RESOLUTION OF CONFLICT
‘It needs to be emphasised that the duty of a court is to decide between the parties on the basis of what has been demonstrated, canvassed and argued in court. It is not the duty of a court to do cloistered justice by making an inquiry into the case outside court, even if such inquiry is limited to examination of documents when the documents had not been examined in court and their examination out of court disclosed matters that had not been brought out and exposed to test in court’- Uwaifo, J.S.C
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN INFERENCE AND SPECULATION
‘Inference is a reasonable deduction from facts whereas speculation is a mere variant of imaginative guess which, even when it appears plausible, should never be allowed by a court of law to fill any hiatus in the evidence before It’- Uwaifo, J.S.C
CASES CITED
Omoregbe v. Lawani (1980) 3-4 SC 108 at 117
Egbunike v. African Continental Bank Ltd (1995) 2 NWLR (Pt.375) 34
Broadline Enterprises Ltd. v. Monterey Maritime Corpn (1995) 9 NWLR (Pt.417) l at 27
Yesufu v. KupperInternational N.V. (1996) 5 NWLR (Pt.446) 17
Omoregbe v. Edo (1971) All NLR 282 at 289
STATUTES REFERRED TO
None.