On factors a petitioner must prove to invalidate an election fraught with corrupt practices inter alia.
For a petitioner to succeed in a case bothering on the fact that an election or return in an election be invalidated by reason of corrupt practices or non- compliance with the provisions of the Electoral Act, he must prove that:
- the corrupt practice or non-compliance took place; (2) the practice or non-compliance substantially affected the result of the election.
Sections 138(1)(b) and 139(1) of the Electoral Act, 2010 (as amended). Awolowo v. Shagari (1979) All NLR 120, Ibrahim v. Shagari (1983) 2 SCNLR 176; Buhari v. Obasanjo (2005) 2 NWLR (Pt. 910) 241; PDP v. INEC (2014) 17 NWLR (Pt. 1437) 525.
Shinkafi & Anor. v. Yari & Ors. [2016] 1 M. J. S. C (Pt. I) [Po 34] Paras. E-G
This section of the article is only available for our subscribers. Please click here to subscribe to a subscription plan to view this part of the article.
Latest from Admin E
- ADMISSION AGAINST INTEREST - Whether a party can rely on an admission against interest of the adverse party
- NEGLIGENCE - What a plaintiff must prove to establish negligence
- STANDARD OF PROOF - Standard of proof in civil cases
- ADMISSION/ADMITTED FACT(S) - Whether admission/admitted facts need further proof
- PROOF - How rate of interest of a bank is to be proved
Leave a comment
Make sure you enter all the required information, indicated by an asterisk (*). HTML code is not allowed.