Notifications
Clear all
Topic starter
June 17, 2019 12:11 pm
“I agree with learned counsel for the respondent that that argument just cannot fly as cross-examination answers are not usually pleaded since a party cannot be in the know or anticipate the mind of the other as to predicting what would be asked in cross-examination therefore if as happened in this case the amount claimed by the respondent and admitted by the appellant's witness under cross-examination tallied with each other, there is no need for further pleading and it is to the advantage of the respondent and nothing stops the Court utilising it as it is as valid as examination in chief. See Adeosun v Governor of Ekiti State (2012) 4 NWLR (Pt.1291) 581 at 600; Gaji v P aye (2003) 8 NWLR (Pt.823) 583 at 611; Mobil Oil (Nig.) Ltd v National Oil & Chemical Marketing Co Ltd (2000) a NWLR (Pt.671) 44 at 52.
PER M. U. PETER-ODILI, J.S.C IN MTN NIGERIA COMMUNICATION LIMITED v. CORPORATE COMMUNICATION INVESTMENT LIMITED APPEAL NO: SC.674/2014
LEGALPEDIA ELECTRONIC CITATION: LER[2019]SC.674/2014
