SUPREME COURT & COURT OF APPEAL DECISIONS (13665)
Children categories
HELD:
"Meanwhile, the Appellants also strenuously contended, in line with the decision of the learned trial judge, that the 1st Respondent's powers of appointment are only activated after the constable has been recruited and enlisted by the 2nd Appellant, that is, appointment of officers only takes place post-enlistment.
HELD:
"However, as the arguments canvassed before this Court by the learned Senior Counsel for the respective parties, there is no dispute on the position that the 1st Respondent is empowered by law to appoint officers into the 1st Appellant, the controversy in this appeal is whether the 1st Respondent's power extends to the recruitment of constables.
HELD:
"In the instant appeal, reference was made to several provisions of the Constitution, Police Act, and the Nigeria Police Regulations, 1968 made thereunder, the Police Service Commission (Establishment) Act, 2001.
HELD:
"The duty of the Court to interpret the relevant provisions of the Constitution and determine the intention of the legislature is a fundamental aspect of constitutional jurisprudence.
HELD:
"The evidence of the Appellant as DW2 and that of the 2nd accused person as DW3 on one hand, and that of the Respondent's witnesses, particularly PW2, PW4 and PW7 on the other hand were materially contradictory.
HELD:
"The burden on the prosecution in a criminal charge is to establish the guilt of the accused person beyond reasonable doubt.
HELD:
"Where there are conflicting or different versions of oral testimonies from the prosecution and the defence, it is the documentary evidence that can resolve such a conflict.
HELD:
"It is trite that he who asserts must prove." See OJO v. FRN (2023) LPELR-59970(SC)
HELD:
"...Although it may appear to be some sort of pre-judgment or premeditated conclusion, which ought not to have been done by the trial Judge, it has not occasioned a miscarriage of justice to the Appellant in any way.