Legal Practitioners (82)
HELD:
"The crux of this issue is whether there was investigation by the NBA to find out if a prima facie case was made out before the matter was referred to the committee for trial.
HELD:
"It is the noble duty of counsel to present correct facts before the Court and not to mislead the Court.
HELD:
"The appellant's contention on the first issue is that the respondent's motion on notice had the names of Nwandu K. Ukoha Esq., and Agbo S. Abuh (Mrs.) and the NBA seal of Agbo Sophia Abuh was fixed without indicating among the two of them who actually signed the motion paper.
HELD:
"...I am also unable to subscribe to Mr. Usha's second argument that Mr. Joseph Valentine Ogizi being a lawyer was bound by Rule 10 of the Legal Practitioners Rules of Professional Conduct to affix his Lawyers stamp and seal on his affidavit supporting applicants' application and his failure to do that invalidated the said affidavit and left the application bereft of facts to support it.
HELD:
"Let me state firstly that the trial Court, at page 115 of the Record, preferring "accelerated trial of the charges against the accused persons" declined to grant the applications for bail respectively filed by the accused persons (including the 3rd Accused/Applicant).
HELD:
"It is very glaring from the facts contained in the printed Record that the Statement of Claim and Reply to Statement of Defence were signed in the name of Fayemi, Folarin and Sonoiki & CO, a law firm.
HELD:
"The issue of an originating process, indeed any other Court process, signed in the name of a Law Firm has long been settled by a full panel of the Supreme Court in the case of F. B. N. v. Maiwada (2013) 5 NWLR (pt. 1348) 444.
HELD:
"In this appeal, Issue Numbers 1, 2 and 3 affects the competence of the Statement of Claim and Reply to the Statement of Defence, it is a challenge to the jurisdiction of the trial Court to entertain the suit.
HELD:
"There is no doubt that both the Rules and Practice of Court require that as an originating process, for a Notice of Appeal to be valid it must be signed either by the appellant himself or by his counsel or legal practitioner.
HELD:
"The law is very clear that as there is no name written to legitimize the contraption, it then goes to nothing and it must be discountenanced.