PETER JONNY LOKE VS THE STATE
July 24, 2025NISHIZAWA LIMITED V STRICHAND N. JETHWANI
July 24, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (1984) Legalpedia (SC) 18725
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria
Fri Dec 14, 1984
Suit Number: SC. 155/1983
CORAM
OBASEKI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
ANIAGOLU, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
COKER, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
KAWU, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
OPUTA, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
ELIKE APPELLANTS
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
During a land matter in the Court of first instance, the defence counsel after calling the 5th defendant closed his case stating that had no address to give as the case presented by the 5th defendant is manifestly opposed to the defendants pleadings. Judgment was delivered for the plaintiff. The matter has been taken through Court of appeal to the Supreme Court.
HELD
The Court allowed the appeal setting aside the judgment of the Court of Appeal and restoring the judgment of the Imo State High Court, sitting at Owerri which gave judgment for the plaintiff.
ISSUES
Whether, as held by the Court of Appeal, there was a want of fair hearing in the court of first instance.
RATIONES DECIDENDI
2. Position and the authority of counsel in relation to the conduct of his case
Counsel conducting a civil case is, as a matter of law and civil procedure, in complete control of his case. He is a master in his own house. He knows the witnesses to call; the number of such witnesses sufficient for the case he is presenting to court; the order of presenting and marshalling those witnesses for the proof of vital points in his case and for effectiveness in support of his case. Per Aniagolu, JSC
3. Interference by the appeal court on findings of fact by the trial court
It has often been stated by this court, based on long established principles that interference by the appeal court on findings of fact by the trial court must be done, not on a rash exercise of naked power, but only on well settled grounds, one of which is certainly not the desire on an appeal court to substitute its own views of the evidence for those of the trial court, without the decision of the trial court being either perverse or being a result of improper exercise of judicial discretion. Per Aniagolu, JSC
1. The binding effect of counsels statements in a trial
It is the accepted general law that statements of counsel, if made on the trial of an action or in the course of an interlocutory proceeding in the presence of the client or his solicitor or someone authorised to represent the solicitor, and not repudiated at the time, bind the client. Per Aniagolu, JSC
CASES CITED
Duncombe v. Daniel (1837) 8 C & P 22-per Denman, C.7
Strauss V. Francis (1866) LR 1 QB 379
Swinfen V. Lord Chelmsford 29 LJ (EX.) at P.397; 5 H. & N. at P.922
Sourendra Nath Mitra & Ors V. Srimati Taurbala Dasi (1930) 46 TLR 191,
Idahosa & Another V. Oronsaye (1954) 4 FSC 166 at 174
STATUTES REFERRED TO
