"The law is clear that there are exceptions to the application of the Limitation Laws. InObot & Ors vs. Shell Petroleum Development Company Nig. Ltd (2013) LPELR-20704 (CA) Pg. 51-52, Para. D – D, this Court held that:

There are some exceptions to the limitation law set by various limitation statutes. These statutory limitations cover cases such as fraud, deliberate concealment by the defendant, or mistake. There are also other circumstances which amount to exceptions to the limitation law. These include circumstances where there is a continuing injury or fresh damage arising from the same injury. Each fresh damage arising from the same injury or continuing injury, gives rise to a fresh cause of action. In Aremo II vs Adekanye (2004) ALL FWLR (PT 224) 2113 at 2132 – 2133 the Supreme Court per Edozie JSC said:
… where there has been a continuance of the damage, a fresh cause of action arises from time to time, as often as damage is caused…  For example if the owner of mine works them and causes damage to the surface more than six years before action, and within six years of action, a fresh subsidence causing damage occurs, without any fresh working by the owner, an action in respect of the fresh damage is not barred as the fresh subsidence resulting in injury gives a fresh cause of action…
See: also A. G. of Rivers State vs. A. G. of Bayelsa State (2012) LPELR-9336 (SC) per Galadima, JSC;NNPC vs. Zaria & Anor (2014) LPELR-22362 (CA) Pg. 56, Para. E – G; INEC vs. Ogbadigbo Local Govt. & Ors (2015) LPELR-24839 (SC) Pg. 57-59, Para. C – C and Nwankwo & Anor vs. Nwankwo (2017) LPELR-42832 (CA) Pg. 21-23, Para. F – E."

PER T. ABUBAKAR, J.C.A. IN THE CASE OF MR. EHIGIE ODIGIE OSIMEN V ZENITH BANK PLC & ORS;LEGALPEDIA ELECTRONIC CITATION: LER[2019]CA/L/976

https://legalpediaresources.com/node/87513