"The law is settled that in both civil and criminal cases that objection to admissibility of a document must be promptly raised at the point of tendering.
Where as in this case Exhibit "J" was tendered without any objection from Appellants or their counsel it is too late in the day to complain of any inadmissibility of Exhibit "J". The Appellants have waived their right to complain on its admissibility and the lower court was right in according it weight in arriving at its decision. See CHIEF BRUNA ETIM & ORS v. CHIEF OKON UDO EKPE & ANOR (1983) NSCC 86 at 95-96 per ANIAGOLU, JSC who said:
"Turning now to the exhibits (4, 6, to 10) which were not objected to all of them previous proceedings and leases. It is something perplexing to see how counsel could turn round on Appeal (before the Court of Appeal) to complain about the admissibility of a document to which he did not object when it was tendered in the court below in the course of trial.
It is a cardinal rule of evidence, and of practice, in civil as well as in criminal cases that an objection to the admissibility of a document sought by a party to be put in evidence is taken when the document is offered in evidence.
Barring some exceptions where by law certain documents are rendered inadmissible (consent or no consent or the parties notwithstanding) for failing to satisfy some conditions or to meet some criteria, the rule still remains inviolate that where objection has not been raised by the opposing party to the reception in evidence of a document(or other evidence see: Chukwura Akunne V. Mathias Ekwuna (1952) 14 W.A.C.A 59), the document will be admitted in evidence and the opposing party cannot afterwards be heard to complain about its admission (see: Alade V. Oluade (1976) 2 S.C. 183 at 188-9; for criminal trials - R. vs. Hammond (1941) 3 All E.R 318; R. vs. Patel (1951) 2 All E.R. 29).
Such exceptions would, among others include an
i. Unregistered instrument required by law to be registered (see: Abdullah Jamal v. Namih Saidi and Another (1993) 11 N.L.R. 86; Elkali and Another v. Fawaz (1940) 6 W.A.C.A. 212; Idowu Alase and Others v. Ilu and Others (1965) N.M.L.R 66);
ii. Unsigned deed of grant (or copy of copy thereof) (Abdul Hamid Ojo v. Private Adejobi and Others (1978) 3 S.C. 65;
iii. Unstamped instrument or document requiring to be stamped, unless it may legally be stamped after execution and the duty and the penalties are paid (see: ROUTLEDGE v. MCKAY (1954) 1 All E.R 855 at 856; 1 W.L.R 615 at 617.)
The contention as to the admissibility of those Exhibits to which objection was not raised is clearly misconceived and entirely without substance." (Underline mine)
Per PETER OLABISI IGE, J.C.A in CHRISTIAN ONYENWE V. CHIEF GODWIN ANAEJIONU (CA); (2014) LPELR-22495(CA)
