OMORHIRHI VS ENATEVWERE
July 18, 2025BAYO ADELUMOLA VS THE STATE
July 18, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (1988-03) Legalpedia (SC) 92745
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria
Fri Mar 4, 1988
Suit Number: SC. 181/1986
CORAM
P. NNAEMEKA-AGU – JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
NNAMANI JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
E.O. OGUWEGBU – JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
WALl JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
AGBAJE JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
1.JUDE EZEOKE
2.UDEONU EZEOKE
3.PETER EZEOKE
4. ROMANUS EZEOKE
5. CHUKWUENYE EZEOKE
6. JOSEPH EZEOKE
APPELLANTS
MOSES NWAGBO
ONYEMAEKEIBEMENUGA (For themselves and on behalf of Umuezeanozie Family of Umuezemere Umuchu)
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
CIVIL PROCEDURE – LAND LAW – RETRIAL -APPEAL
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The plaintiffs for themselves and on behalf of Umuezeanozie family, Umuezemere, Umuchu, claimed against the Defendants personally for Declaration of title of ownership, damages for trespass committed by the defendants on the said land and A perpetual injunction restraining the defendants, their servants and/or agents from entering the land in dispute.
HELD
That It was wrong for the Court of Appeal to have ordered a new trial in the circumstances – an order which, in the appropriate metaphor, would have given the respondents the opportunity to have a second bite at the cherry and to prove afresh what they had failed to prove. This should not be.
ISSUES
whether in view of those findings of act by the court of trial which were confirmed or not reversed by the Court of Appeal, the latter court was right to have reversed the decision of the High Court and ordered a retrial.
RATIONES DECIDENDI
CORRECTION OF ERRORS IN JUDGMENTS.
‘It is not every slip of a Judge in his judgment that can result in the judgment being upset. For a mistake to so result, it must be substantial in the sense that it affected the decision appealed against.’ Per. P. NNAEMEKA-AGU, JSC.
A JUDGMENT MUST ADDRESS ALL ISSUES.
‘A judgment of a court in a civil case, appellate or otherwise, must show a clear resolution of all the issues that arise for decision in the case in accordance with the correct principles and end up with an ultimate verdict which flows logically from the facts as found.’ Per. P. NNAEMEKA-AGU, JSC.
CASES CITED
Onojobi v. Olanipekun (1985) 11 SC. (Pt. 2) 156, at p. 163,
R. Mogaji & Ors v. Madam Rabiatu Odofin (1978)3 SC. (Reprint) 53; (1978) 4 SC. 91 at p.92-97,
Alhaji Akibu v. Joseph Opaleye (1974) 11 SC. (Reprint) 141; (1974) 11 SC. 189, p.203; also Samuel Ola Oladehin v. Continental Textile Mills Ltd (1978) 2 SC. (Reprint)17; (1978) 2 SC. 23.
Aromire v. Awoyemi (1972) 2 SC. (Reprint) 1; (1972)1 AII NLR. 101.
D.O. Idundun & Ors v. Daniel Okumagba (1976) 9 -10 SC. (Reprint) 140; (1976) 9-10 SC. 227, at 246,
Da Costa v. Ikomi (1968) 1 AII NLR. 394 at 398.
Mustafa Lawal v. Abdul Ijale (1967) NMLR. 155.
Polycarp Ojogbue & Anor. v. Ajie Nnubia & 4 Ors (1972) 1 AII NLR. (Pt. 2) 226,
Onyema Oke & Ors v. Amos Eke & Ors.(1982) 12 SC. (Reprint) 100; (1982) 12 SC. 218;
Chief James Okpisi & Ors v. Chief Igoni Jonah (1961) 1 AII NLR. 102.
Bray v. Ford (1896) AC. 44, at p.50;
Lionel Barber & Co. v. Deutsche Bank (1919) AC. 304
Ajayi v. Fisher (1956) 1 FSC. 90;
Shehu v. Ogedengbe (1960) 5 FSC. 266.
STATUTES REFERRED TO
Evidence Act,
