INTERPRETING THE PROVISIONS OF A STATUTE - DUTY OF COURT WHEN CALLED UPON TO INTERPRET THE PROVISIONS OF A STATUTE
"It has become necessary now for me to recall the statement made by this Court, in Unipetrol v. E.S.B.LR. (2006) All FWLR (pt.317) 413 at 423, on what we should always bear in mind when we are called upon to interpret a provision of statute. That is: that the words of a statute are to be' given their ""ordinary meaning, and that the cardinal principle of law on interpretation is that a court, when interpreting a provision of a statute, must give the words and the language used their simple and ordinary meaning. It is not permissible, therefore, to go outside the words of the provision to introduce extraneous matters that may lead to circumventing or giving the provision an entirely different meaning from what the lawmaker intended it to be. In other words, nothing must be added to, and nothing must be taken from the statute. By this, we shall not interpret the provision to mean what it does not mean, or to interpret it not to mean what it means in actuality. That should be the golden rule".
PER E.EKO,J.S.C IN THE CASE OF SUNDAY GABRIEL EHINDERO V FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA & ANOR; LER(2018)SC. 137/2014