Stare Decisis (84)
HELD:
"The interesting point made by the Appellant that this Court should depart from its position held in numerous cases on this point is completely unwarranted.
HELD:
"This Court is bound by precedent when the facts of the previous decisions have similar material facts with the case before the Court.
HELD:
"One final word on this issue, Okutepa, SAN, learned senior counsel for the appellant, cited Garba v University of Maiduguri [1986] 1 NWLR (pt 18) 550, Denloye v Medical and Dental Practitioners Disciplinary Committee [1968] 1 ANLR 306, 311, Sofekun v Akinyemi [1980] NSCC 175, 184 - 185.
HELD:
"...it must be borne in mind always, that each case must be considered on its own particular or peculiar facts or circumstances.
HELD:
"...the place of precedent, the doctrine of stare decisis, in adjudication is an eminent one.
HELD:
"It is well settled that in determining whether a decision qualifies as precedent, a Judge cannot just pick a sentence here and there, then build upon it because the essence of the decision is its ratio decidendi; and not every observation made in the Judgment.