era of delaying tactics

I have to state at least to decry the practice that has unfolded before this court in this application, documents and arguments seeking to persuade the court to go along as that of a deployment of tricks of a trade to frustrate or stultify through seductive arguments the right properly inuring to a party. This practice has to stop and a party has to know where to pull the brakes and fulfill obligations it has a duty to do and to comply with court orders such as the Garnishee Order Absolute. The administration of justice has no room for dribbling as usually seen in football fields of play while a successful party is made to suffer when justice is on its side. Okafor v. Nnaife (1987) 4 NWLR (Pt.64) 129 at 137; NNPC v. Famfa Oil Ltd. (2009) 12 NWLR (Pt.1156) 462 at 481

On principles guilding considreation of application for extension of time

When a court is invited to make an order extending the time prescribed by the rules of court for taking certain procedural steps it must be borne in mind that such rules of court must be obeyed. if there is default in taking the procedural steps within the prescribed period a court order extending such period being a discretionary one there must be some material upon which to base the execrise of that discretion Williams v.Hope Rising Voluntary Funds Society (1982)1-2 SC 145

Whether documents in support of pleaded facts need specifically be pleaded

Documents in support of facts pleaded need not to be specifically pleaded but can be tendered in evidence to support or prove the facts pleaded.Documents that are alluded to in the evidence even if they are not specifically pleaded.See Odunsi v. Bamgbala (1995)1 NWLR (Pt.374)641;Amadi v. Olumati (1995)7NWLR (Pt.410)739;F.B.N Plc v. Tsokwa (2004)5NWLR (pt.866)271

How to file a notice of preliminary objection when on appeal

Whenever a respondent does not file a separate notice of preliminary objection to the hearing of an appeal giving three clear days'notice thereof beforethe hearing but merely incorporates the preliminary objection in the respondents'brief of arguement. It is imperative on the respondent to move the court to takethe preliminary objection first before proceeding to the main appeal. See: Tiza v. Behga (2005)15NWLR (pt.949)616

But where the respondent does not apply for or seek leave of court before hearing of an appeal to move his preliminary objection automatically becomes and shall be deemd abandoned

JOINDER OF PARTIES

Although courts have always been reluctant to allow the joinder in the cases where joinder is sought by the defendants against the wishes of the plaintiff and without the consent of the person sought to be joined i.e Where the joinder is not being sought by an intervener or by the plaintiff in the action

RIGHT OF FINAL ADDRESS WHO HAS IT?

The party that addresses first has the final right to reply on points of law- no more,no less,and a party shall not be allowed to have a second bite at the cherry

N.B. The rules governing brief writing do not differ in that respect

REVERSAL OF JUDGMENTS: A RARE POSSIBILITY?

It is not every error of the trial court that will lead to a reversal of its judgment.It is only those mistakes that have been shown to have affected or influenced the decision appealed against that will result in the appeal being allowed. See F.B.N v. Offih (2004)5NWLR (pt.867)540

Sentencing

The sentencing power of a judge is predicated on his discretionary powers,which must be seen to have been exercised judicially or judiciously.See Isang v. State (1996)7NWLR (pt.473)458

N.B. HOW DO YOU DETERMINE THIS DISCRETION?

RAISING A FRESH ISSUE ON APPEAL

Where a party wishes to raise and argue any fresh issue in an appeal which was not raised or canvassed at the lower court,he must seek for and obtain leave of the appellate court before he can validly do so.The only exception to this rule against fresh issues without leave is where the issue is or relates to the question of jurisdiction which can be raised at any stage even for the first time without leave.Where leave is required and has not been sought or obtained as in the present case,the issue (or point) so raised will be regarded as incompetent and either struck out or discountenanced See: Obiakor v. State (2002)10 NWLR (pt.776)612; Gaji v. Paye (2003)8NWLR (Pt.823)583; Makanjuola v. Balogun (1989)3NWLR (pt.108)192; Oredoyin v. Arowolo(1989) 4NWLR (pt.114)172