KESHINRO V. BAKARE & ORS

• Pages: 279-283

KESHINRO V. BAKARE & ORS



279

Judge

appears

to have

entirely overlooked and ailed

to

deal

with most material

facts of the plaintiff's claim."

and whilst we agree with the general pronouncement therein the case is

5



distinguishable as there apparently counsel for the plaintiff was not given adequate

opportunity to address the court upon his case whilst in the present appeal it is not

disputed that he was.

Notwithstanding the provisions of the rules we are, therefore, of the opinion

that just as in England a Judge can stop a case on the conclusion of the plaintiff's

10



case after hearing his counsel if he has not in law made out his claim or the jury,

where there is one, can stop it after hearing the plaintiff and if his counsel had been

given an opportunity to address it,

SO

here we do not think the rules deprive the

courts in Western Nigeria of this right. What they do is to require a defence coun-

sel who submits there is no case for his client to answer to elect first whether to

15



call evidence or to stand upon his submission. They are in other words limiting

the effect of a defence objection, not preventing the inherent right of the judge on

a point of law or a Jury, or a Judge without a Jury generally from from stopping a

case at the end of the plaintiff's case without hearing the defendant. Where a Judge

is sitting alone he is, of course, both Judge and Jury, but here the learned trial

20



Judge referred to whether there was a case to go to the Jury thus implying it was

whether in law the case for the plaintiff had, if believed, been made out, and it was

on that basis and not in his capacity as Judges and Jury that he dealt with it in his

judgment and no argument on this appeal has been addressed to us that he came

to a wrong conclusion on that basis so no issue on the merits arises and we do,

25



therefore, make no comments ther3on save to say we would echo the words of

the learned trial Judge when he said - "I am in considerable sympathy with the

plaintiff for the way he has been treated by the defendants." The appeal is accord-

ingly dismissed with 30 guineas costs.

Appeal dismissed.

30

KESHINRO

V.

BAKARE & ORS

35

ABUDU SALAMI KESHINRO

V.

40 LASISI BAKARE AND OTHERS

SUPREME COURT OF NIGERIA

BRETT,



J.S.C.

45



LEWIS,



J.S.C.

MADARIKAN,



J.S.C.

8th December, 1967

APPELLANT/

CROSS-RESPONDENT

RESPONDENTS/

CROSS-APPELLANT

SUIT NO. SC 602/1965

Civil Action - Practice and Procedure - Discrepancy between writ and statement

50



of claim - Whet'ter statement of claim supersedes writ

Appeals - Appeals in civil cases - Refusal of leave to amend writ - Single

judgment refusing leave and ordering non-suit - Refusal of leave an interlocutory

order - Leave to appeal required.