Principles guiding the grant or refusal of amendments

On Principles guiding the grant or refusal of  amendments Ndefo v Obiese (2000) 15 NWLR (Pt.692) 820 An amendment of the pleadings for the purpose of determining the real questions in controversy between the parties will be allowed at any stage of the proceedings unless such amendment will entail injustice or surprise or embarrassment to other party or where the applicant is acting mala fide or by his blunder the applicant has done some injury to the respondent which cannot be compensated by costs or otherwise Ehidimhen v Musa  (2000) 8NWLR (Pt.699)540 SC The court will always look at the materiality of a proposed amendment before making an order. Thus, where an amendment will allow the pleadings to be in line with evidence and findings made by the trial Judge the same will be allowed An amendment of pleadings should be allowed UNLESS (a) it will entail injustice to the respondent; or (b) the applicant is acting mala fide; or (c) by his blunder, the applicant has done some injury to the respondent which cannot be compensated for by costs or otherwise See also Ojah v Ogboni (1976) 4 SC 69 An amendment that is designed to create a suit that was not in existence is not permissible. See St Mathew-Daniel v Bamgbose 19 NLR 73 FBN plc v Tsokwa. (2000) 13 NWLR (Pt.685) 521 (CA) On when court will refuse to grant application for amendment where: *The amendment will cause injustice to a party to the proceedings. *The amendment will surprise or cause embarrasment to the other party *The applicant is acting mala fide in bringing the application for amendment *The applicant by blunder has donr some injury to the respondent which cannot be compensated by costs or otherwise *The amendment has the effect of changing the action into one of a substantially different character *The amendment will not cure the defect in the proceedings *The amendment is inconsistent and useless *The amendment is not material *The amendment is capable of causing undue delay to the case See also the case of FBN v May Med Clinics and Diagnostic Centre Lttd (1996) 9 NWLR (Pt.471) 195 LIST OF CASES Ehidimhen v. Musa (2000) 8NWLR (Pt.699)540 SC FBN Plc v Tsokwa (2000) 13 NWLR (Pt.685) 521 CA Ndefo v Obiese (2000) 15 NWLR (Pt.692) 820 CA

Human rights

Evaluation of evidence- Guidelines

In the process of evaluating of evidence the court must have regard to certain guidelines like (a) admissibility of the evidence(b) relevancy of the evidence(c) credibility of the evidence(d) conclusiveness of the evidence(e) probability of the evidence of one party more than that of the other. The trial court having satisfied itself that the foregoing have been complied with would then apply the law to the situation presented in the case before it so as to arrive at a conclusion one way or the otherSee Mogaji v. Odofin (1978)4 SC 91; Akibu v.Opaleye (1974)11 SC 139 

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

On What constitutes a contract

A contract is an agreement between two or more parties which creates reciprocal legal obligation or obligations to do or not to do a particular thing.For a valid contract to be formed,there must be mutuality of purpose and intention.The two or more minds must meet at the same point,event or incident.They must not meet at different points,events or incidents.They must be saying the same thing at the same time

On ingredients of contract

There are five ingredients that must be present in a valid contract.They are offer,acceptance, consideration,intention to create legal relationship and capacity to contract.All these five ingredients are autonomous units in the sense that a contract cannot be formed if any of them is absent

N.B For a contract to exist in all the five ingredients must be present