MOBIL OIL (NIG.) LIMITED VS CHIEF J. O. AGADAIGHO
July 18, 2025KARIMU OLUJINLE VS BELLO ADEAGBO
July 18, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (1988-04) Legalpedia (SC) 41177
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria
Fri Apr 29, 1988
Suit Number: SC 5/1987
CORAM
NNAMANI JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
ESO JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
BELGORE JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
AKPATA JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
SUNDAY OKODUWA
PATIENCE AGHAMELO
PATRICK OGUN
ANTHONY UGBOKE
AUGUSTINE OBOH
KENNEDY IYINBOR
APPELLANTS
THE STATE
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
Not Available
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The Appellants, Sunday Okoduwa, Patience Aghamelo, Patrick Ogun, Anthony Ugboke, Augustine Oboh, Anthony Usman Gogo and Kenedy lyinbor were charged for Robbery, punishable under Section 1(2) (a) of the Robbery and Firearms (Special Provisions) Decree No. 47 of 1970.
HELD
APPEAL ALLOWED
ISSUES
Not Available
RATIONES DECIDENDI
THE PART IN WHICH A JUDGE TAKES WHILE WITNESSES GIVE EVIDENCE IS AT ITS DISCRETION
“The part which a Judge ought to take while witnesses are giving their evidence must, of course, rest with his discretion. But with the utmost respect to the Judge it was, I think, unfortunate that he took so large part as he did …………………..It is of course, always proper for a Judge – and it is his duty – to put questions with a view to elucidating an obscure answer or when he thinks that the witness has misunderstood a question put to him by counsel. If there are certain matters which the Judge considers have not been sufficiently cleared up or questions which he himself thinks ought to have been put, he can, of course take steps to see that the deficiency is made good. It is I think generally more convenient to do this when counsel has finished his questions or is passing to a new subject” LORD GREEN MR, PER NNAMANI J.S.C
CASES CITED
Not Available
STATUTES REFERRED TO
Not Available
