instances where amendments of pleadings will not be granted

It is trite that parties are at liberty to amend their pleadings whenever it is appropriate to do so in order to bring into focus the real issues in controversy for determination by the court BUT.... An amendment that gives an impression of an act in BAD FAITH is not to be entertained and allowed. What is paramount in the mind of the court always is to ensure that justice is served to all parties who should not be allowed to take UNDUE ADVANTAGE of the other. The court in checking against any such surreptitious motive will always consider the balance of convenience between parties of the outcome of the application. In general, amendment which will enhance the Justice of a case will hardly be refused by any court except however it occurs to the judge in his opinion that the intention is FRAUDULENT and with a HIDDEN AGENDA which will generally work INJUSTICE against the opponent. The law in such a situation has therefore given the court wide discretionary powers to exercise in the determination of each case which should be considered always on its own peculiar circumstances, bearing in mind that same sets of cases with similar facts may not necessarily yield the same outcome. Amendments are more easily granted where the grant does not necessitate the calling of additional evidence or changing the character of the case on the ground that no prejudice would result from the amendment. Laguro v. Tolu (1992) 2 NWLR (Pt.223) 228; Imonikhe v. A.-G; Bendel State (1992) 6 NWLR (Pt.248) 396