CORAM

ADEMOLA, CHIEF JUSTICE, NIGERIA

COKER, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

MADARIKAN, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

PARTIES

JOSEPH ADU APPELLANTS

RESPONDENTS

AREA(S) OF LAW

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The respondent was convicted by a magistrate court for contempt of court for retaking possession of land which ownership has been awarded to the appellant. The High Court set aside his conviction on the ground that the land he re- possessed was not identified .

HELD

The court held that identity of the land was not in issue because the respondent admitted retaking possession and set aside the decision of the High Court.

ISSUES

Whether the High Court was right when it set aside the conviction of the respondent for contempt on the ground that the land in respect of which he is in contempt was not identified.

RATIONES DECIDENDI

WHEN IDENTIFICATION OF LAND IS NOT NECESSARY

<br< p=””></br<>

CASES CITED

STATUTES REFERRED TO

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT