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