SEGUN AJIBADE V THE STATE

SUBJECT-MATTER

CRIMINAL LAW

LAW OF EVIDENCE

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

FAIR HEARING

CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT – POWER OF COURT TO CONVICT ON VOLUNTARY STATEMENT OF AN ACCUSED

FAIR HEARING-GUIDING PRINCIPLES OF FAIR TRIAL

CONFESSIONAL STATEMENT – STATUS WHEN ADMITTED WITHOUT ANY OBJECTION

Where a confessional statement is therefore admitted without any objection the irresistible inference is that same was made voluntarily and a court can rightly convict on the basis of admission contained therein.” PER CLARA BATA-OGUNBIYI, JSC

CLICKHERE TO VIEW CASE

SENATOR JOHN AKPANUDOEDEHE V GODSWILL OBOT AKPABIO

SUBJECT-MATTER

ELECTION PETITION

ELECTION TRIBUNAL

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

FAIR HEARING

LIMITATION OF TIME

When the Constitution provides a limitation period for the hearing of a matter (in this case 180 days) the right to fair hearing is guaranteed by the courts within 180 days. Once 180 days elapsed the hearing of the matter fades away along with any right to fair hearing. There is no longer a live petition left. There is nothing to be tried even if a retrial order is given. It remains extinguished forever.

Per Bode Rhodes-Vivour J.S.C.

Click here to view case

GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY V. HARRY AYOADE AKANDE &4 ORS.

SUBJECT MATTER

FAIR HEARING

1. FAIR HEARING- PRINCIPLE OF

2. DUTY OF COURTS- JUDGES MUST HEAR ALL APPLICATIONS MADE BY LITIGANTS.

3. PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE- WHEN AN APPLICATION CAN BE DISMISSED.

    A judge must hear all applications, no matter how simple or frivolous they may appear, and it is only after counsel is afforded a hearing that an order striking out the motion can be said to be appropriate”. Bode Rhodes- Vivour, JSC.

Click here to view case

ACTION CONGRESS OF NIGERIA v. SULE LAMIDO & 4 ORS

SUBJECT MATTER:

FAIR- HEARING – TEST OF-

 EVIDENCE – EVALUATION OF PROBATIVE VALUE.

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE- PURPOSE OF FRONT LOADING.

COURT – DUTY OF A JUDGE.

APPEAL – ATTITUDE OF THE SUPREME COURT TO CONCURRENT FINDINGS OF THE LOWER COURTS.

It has long been settled that the test whether a party in a case was given a fair hearing is the impression of a reasonable   person who was present at the trial or who was aware of the proceedings.” BODE RHODES- VIVOUR, JSC

Click here to view case

MILITARY GOVERNOR OF LAGOS STATE V. ADEBAYO ADEYIGA

SUBJECT MATTER

LAND LAW

FAIR HEARING – DETERMINATION OF IN CIVIL CASES

EVALUATION OF EVIDENCE –ROLE OF COURT

MANDATORY INJUNCTION – GRANT OF

HOLIDAYS – WHETHER CONSTITUTIONAL FOR THE COURT TO SIT

The court will always invoke its equitable jurisdiction and exercise its discretion to grant a mandatory injunction where the injury done to the plaintiff cannot be estimated and sufficiently compensated by damages and the injury to the plaintiff is so serious and material that the restoration of things to their former condition is the only method whereby justice can be adequately donePER ADEKEYE JSC

Click here to view case

CHIEF FELIX AMADI & ANOR. V INDEPENDENT NATIONAL ELECTORAL COMMISSION& 2 ORS.

SUBJECT-MATTER

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE- ELECTION PETITION-SECTION 285(7) OF THE 1999 CONSTITUTION (as amended)

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE- ELECTION PETITION-JURISDICTION-RIGHT TO FAIR-HEARING

It is very important to note that the provisions of Section 285(7) supra does not deny an appellant the right to fair-hearing, just like every statute of limitation. It merely gives all parties and the court a time frame within which parties are to exercise their right to fair hearing in a relevant appeal. If for whatever reason the appeal is not heard within the allotted time frame it cannot be said that an appellant affected thereby has been denied his right to fair hearing.

Click here to view case

ANTHONY OKORO V THE STATE

SUBJECT MATTER

CRIMINAL LAW.

MURDER, FAIR HEARING, CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE.

Fair Hearing: Failure to provide an interpreter, whether it will vitiate the court’s judgement

The failure to provide an interpreter has always been treated as a matter of procedure and a conviction would not be disturbed on appeal except it can be shown that the failure to provide an interpreter led to miscarriage of justice”  Per-  Bode  Rhodes-Vivour  .JSC

Click here to view case

S & D CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LIMITED V CHIEF BAYO KUKU

SUBJECT-MATTER

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – HEARING NOTICE- WHEN NEEDED

FUNDAMENTAL HUMAN RIGHTFAIR HEARING – WHAT CONSTITUTES BREACH OF

COURT- CONCURRENT FINDINGS OF TWO LOWER COURTS- WHEN THE SUPREME COURT WILL INTERFERE.

A party as herein, who already knows or is reasonably presumed to know of the date for which its case is scheduled for hearing, does not require hearing notice to be served on it.

Per John Afolabi Fabiyi J.S.C.

Click here to view case

OGED OVUNWO & ANOR V IHEANYICHUKWU WOKO & 2 ORS

SUBJECT MATTER

LAND LAW

COURT- DUTY OF: CONSEQUNCE OF FAILURE TO CARRY OUT THE DUTY.

COURT- APPELLATE COURT- DUTY OF WHERE A LOWER COURT HAS FAILED TO RESOLVE A VITAL ISSUE PUT BEFORE IT.

JUDGMENT- CONTENT OF

FAIR HEARING – CONSEQUENCE OF BREACH OF IN A PROCEEDING.

Fair-hearing is a fundamental constitutional right as entrenched in the 1999 constitution as amended. And the breach of fair-hearing in any proceedings without more vitiates such proceedings in their entirety; it renders the entire proceedings null and void

Per C.M. Chukwuma-Eneh J.S.C.

Click Here to view case