“It is now a settled matter that once issues are presented before a court it has to attend to each and every one of them save for when any aspect is subsumed in the already considered issue that it can be taken as settled. In this I call in aid the following dicta. NTA v Babatope(1996) 4 NWLR ( Pt.440) 75 at 89, Pats – Acholonu JCA (as he then was) held that:-

“in considering the case put forward by the parties, I note with regret that the learned trial judge did not seem to have applied his mind analytically to the two sides of the case, i.e., the address of both counsel, it does not matter what his conclusions would have been, but a judgment which when viewed from all parameters, seems to be based pointedly on the case or submission of one party, does not quite reflect the orthodox method of adjudication. Even if the other parties is talking legal nonsense, he should make a finding of that nonsense.” by PER M. U. PETER-ODILI, J.S.C., in