If there are two conflicting laws applicable to a circumstance, situation or fact, it bears the question of which of these two conflicting laws shall be considered and applied. One cannot just take any one based on speculative mind since the law has to be certain. In this vain, this piece brings to you a thorough research of the subject matter with adequate authorities. The maxim “ Leges posteriores priores contrarias abrogant ” is translated as “ [s]ubsequent laws repeal prior conflicting ones” — See Black's Law Dictionary (8th ed. 2004), Page 5327. To put differently, later laws abrogate earlier contrary ones. It is a principle which states that, where two laws or legal instruments conflict, the one adopted later in time, rather than the one adopted earlier, is considered binding on the relevant parties. That is, when two statutes conflict, the one enacted last prevails. The provisions of a later document are contrary to those of an earlier, the earliest must ...
The position of the law is that a person who was not a party to a suit at the trial court can appeal to the court of appeal as an interested party but to do that he must seek the leave of the court and such leave cannot be subsumed into a trinity prayer because the leave is a condition precedent and failure to obtain it renders the court incompetent to assume jurisdiction and the trial court is the most appropriate court from where the leave should be seek first. This position of law was reiterated by the Supreme Court in the case of F.A.A.N V. Bi Courtney Ltd. (2025) 7 NWLR (pt. 1989) 365. The brief narration of the fact of the case and what led to the above pronouncements by the Apex Court is that The Federal Government of Nigeria granted a concession to Bi Courtney Limited(1st respondent) for the redevelopment of the fire-razed Murtala Mohammed Airport Domestic Terminal 2 (MMA2) in Ikeja, Lagos, under a Build, Operate, and Transfer (BOT) arrangement. The concession ...
A confession is relevant and admissible in evidence, so long as it is voluntarily made and not as a result of threat or inducement. A confessional statement is admissible once it is direct and positive relating to the acts of the accused, with knowledge or intention, stating or suggesting the inference that he committed the offence. Section 29 of the Evidence Act 2011 provides that a confession is relevant and admissible in evidence, so long as it is voluntarily made and not as a result of threat or inducement. Where a court is satisfied that a confession was freely and voluntarily made and that it is direct, positive and unequivocal as to the accused person’s participation in the crime alleged, it may rely solely on the confession to ground a conviction. A confession is a statement written or orally made voluntarily by an accused person charged with the commission of a crime to another person where he admits or acknowledges his guilt in respect of the offence charged and s...
Comments
Post a Comment