-
A Review of Digital Rights Lawyers Initiative V Unity Bank on Approaching the Administrative Redress Panel as a Condition Precedent to an Action Under the Nigeria Data Protection Regulation
0₦2,500.00Felix Emmanuel, Associate at Olaniwun Ajayi LP, in his article, A Review of Digital Rights Lawyers Initiative V Unity Bank on Approaching the Administrative Redress Panel as a Condition Precedent to an Action Under the Nigeria Data Protection Regulation, critically examines the decision of the Federal High Court in Incorporated Trustees of Digital Rights Lawyers Initiative v Unity Bank Plc (the “Case”) where the Court held that the failure of the Applicant to approach the Administrative Redress Panel before instituting the action to enforce the rights of data subjects under the Nigeria Data Protection Regulation (“NDPR”), divested the Court of jurisdiction. The Court held that Article 4.2 of the NDPR creates a condition precedent to the institution of actions to enforce data subjects’ rights under the NDPR. Emmanuel masterfully examines all aspects of the Case against the backdrop of relevant laws and regulations.
-
A Review of the Procedural Jurisdiction of the National Industrial Court of Nigeria on Grey Area Claims
0₦2,500.00Professor Offornze Amucheazi of Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka, and Partner, Amucheazi, Ozioko & Co, in his article, “A Review of the Procedural Jurisdiction of the National Industrial Court of Nigeria on Grey Area Claims”, examines the National Industrial Court’s exercise of jurisdiction over ancillary matters ‘arising from, related to or connected with’ subject matters within its core jurisdiction. He argues that despite being empowered in that regard, the NIC, from a review of several cases, appears to have restricted itself strictly to the core subject matters of its jurisdiction enumerated in the Constitution, and excluded adjudication on ancillary subject matters inextricably linked with the underlying labour and employment matters. He concludes that this cautious approach may leave aggrieved claimants without a judicial forum for their grievances, or lead to multiplicity of claims in different courts over issues arising from the same subject matter and the same set of facts.
-
A Review of the Supreme Court’s Decision in Heritage Bank Limited v Benworth Finance (Nig) Ltd on Court Processes Signed in the Name of a Law Firm
0₦2,500.00Folabi Kuti, Partner Perchstone & Graeys, in A Review of The Supreme Court’s Decision in Heritage Bank Limited v Benworth Finance (Nigeria) Limited On Court Processes Signed in the Name of a Law Firm, contemplates the diverse interpretations that have greeted the recent decision of the apex court in the cited case arguably relaxing some aspects of the rule in Okafor v Nweke. Folabi takes a critical look at the reverberations and the unintended underlying strands the decision may have brought up.
-
Adjournment of Proceedings Sine Die Pending Appeal: Has the Decision of the Supreme Court in Alioke V Oye Changed the Law?
0₦2,500.00Sir Isaac Obi, Partner at Alliance Law Firm, in his article, Adjournment of Proceedings Sine Die Pending Appeal: Has the Decision of the Supreme Court in Alioke V Oye Changed the Law? explains that adjournment of court proceedings, sine die, pending appeal has been one of the ways the appellate courts maintain and preserve their superiority over lower courts in Nigeria. Once an appeal has been properly entered before an appellate court and the lower court is formally notified, it is automatically stripped of its jurisdiction on that matter until the appellate court concludes the matter. Recently, it has been argued that the decision of the Supreme Court in Alioke v Oye has changed the law. It is argued that an appeal does not operate as a stay of proceedings and that until the appellate court makes a definite order compelling the lower court to adjourn the matter, the lower court retains its discretion whether or not to adjourn the matter sine die, pending appeal, irrespective of the fact that an appeal has been entered. Sir Obi critically analyses the decision in Alioke v Oye to see whether the law has really changed.
-
Admissibility of Public Documents and Photocopies of Certified True Copies of Public Documents
0₦2,500.00Professor Joseph Abugu, SAN, in this article, Admissibility of Public Documents and Photocopies of Certified True Copies of Public Documents, examines two critical vexed issues on the admissibility of public documents. The first interrogates what qualifies as a public document within the provisions of the Evidence Act 2011. The second addresses the admissibility of photocopies of certified true copies of public documents. Professor Abugu posits that the essential quality of a public document must be ascertained by a conjunctive reading of sections 102 and 104 of the Evidence Act which specifies that the document must be one being kept under legal obligation by a public authority with open access by members of the public who seek to obtain a copy thereof and that routine communications of government agencies and statutory bodies do not so qualify. He also finds that the current exposition of the law on the admissibility of photocopies of certified true copies of public companies is as articulated in the 1969 decision of the Supreme court in Minister of Lands v. Azikiwe (SC) as applied in Ogboru v. Uduaghan (CA) and affirmed by the Supreme Court in Emeka v. Chuba-Ikpeazu & Ors. and in Oboh & Anr v. FNL Ltd.
-
An Examination of the Criminal Liabilities of Doctors in the Nigerian Healthcare System
0₦2,500.00Dr Moses Ediru, formerly of Benue State University, and Ogaga Ediru in their article, An Examination of the Criminal Liabilities of Doctors in the Nigerian Healthcare System, comprehensively examine the criminal liabilities of doctors and how doctors could be made accountable for criminal acts or omissions done while discharging their duties. The authors consider liability for criminal negligence, murder, manslaughter, illegal abortion, and offences under the National Health Act. They also consider defences that are available to a doctor.
-
An Overview of the National Industrial Court (Civil Procedure) Rules 2016
0₦2,500.00Folabi Kuti, Partner, Perchstone & Graeys gives “An Overview of The National Industrial Court of Nigeria (Civil Procedure) Rules 2016” in his beautifully written article. He x-rays the salient and revolutionary provisions of the new Rules, the confusion between the short and long titles, and the applicability of ratified but undomesticated treaties by the National Industrial Court.
-
Appeal from the Court of Appeal to the Supreme Court on Grounds of Mixed Law and Fact: A Right in Legal Limbo?
0₦2,500.00Obinna Akpuchukwu, Partner Allen & Marylebone and Izunna Ozuo, Associate at Aluko & Oyebode in their article, Appeal from the Court of Appeal to the Supreme Court on Grounds of Mixed Law and Fact: A Right in Legal Limbo? note that Appeals from the decisions of the Court of Appeal lie to the Supreme Court except in certain circumstances established in the Constitution. However, a pronouncement of His Lordship Bode Rhodes-Vivour, JSC in Shittu v PAN Ltd and the Second Alteration of the Constitution appear to take away the right of appeal of an aggrieved party when the appeal borders on mixed law and fact. Obinna and Izunna query the rationale behind the pronouncement and argue that the decision does not constitute a binding precedent in Nigerian judicature. They opine that notwithstanding the Second Alteration of the Constitution, appeals on grounds of mixed law and fact from the Court of Appeal to the Supreme Court remain sacrosanct.
-
Arbitration in Nigeria – A Review of Law and Practice
0₦2,500.00David Ike, Lecturer, Faculty of Law, Imo State University, Owerri in his article “Arbitration in Nigeria-A Review of Law and Practice” gives an overview of the development of arbitration and its practice in Nigeria. He discusses current issues in arbitration including the constitutionality of section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, pre-emptive court proceedings, recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards, and arbitrators’ fees.
-
Case Scheduling and Management in Nigeria: Between the Rules and Practice – Order 22 of the Court of Appeal Rules in Focus
0₦2,500.00Dr Chukwuma Chinwo and Mondenghe Essien of the Amazing Grace Partners, Port Harcourt, Nigeria, in their article, Case Scheduling and Management in Nigeria: Between the Rules and Practice – Order 22 of the Court of Appeal Rules In Focus, note that the problem of delay in the administration of justice is a universal and age-old one. Many nations and jurisdictions have devised different methods by which they can curb the adverse effects. Chinwo and Essien review the problem in Nigeria, examine the constitutional provisions and identify some factors contributing to delay in the administration of justice. They proffer some solutions by examining Order 22 of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2021, which makes express provisions for case management and scheduling. They conclude that there is a lot to be done by the courts and other stakeholders in the justice delivery chain to attain the essence of the reforms anticipated by the rules.
-
Conviction without a Chemist’s Report: A Review of Nkie v FRN
0₦2,500.00Dr Moses Ediru, of the Faculty of Law, Benue State University in his article “Conviction Without a Chemist’s Report: A Review of Nkie v FRN“, argues that in the trial of drug possessory cases, where the offence is one constituted by expert evidence, presentation of a Chemist’s Report is imperative. In the case under review, the appellant was charged, tried and convicted based on the outcome of a preliminary colour test conducted by the arresting NDLEA officials using the United Nations Narcotics Identification Testing kits. The suspected substance was not analysed at the NDLEA Laboratory and a Chemist’s Report issued pursuant to the analysis, in proof of the nature of the suspected substance. The article argues that the offence being one constituted by expert evidence according to the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency Act, the leaning of the Supreme Court on the appellant’s confessional statement and plea of guilty in affirming his conviction and sentence without due regard to the scientific proof of the nature of the substance possessed rendered the conviction and sentence unlawful.
-
Determination of the Jurisdiction of the Federal High Court Over Contractual Matters- A Review of the Supreme Court Decision in Crestar V SPDC
0₦2,500.00Kingsley Ibe and Ilemobade Olateru-Olagbegi, both of Babalakin & Co, in their article, Determination of the Jurisdiction of the Federal High Court Over Contractual Matters- A Review of the Supreme Court Decision in Crestar V SPDC, examine the incipient confusion over the decision of the Supreme Court that a Federal High Court has no jurisdiction over contractual matters; whether the contract is simple or ‘complex’. They explore the historical jurisdiction of both States and Federal High Court on contracts, and argue that the Federal High Court should still have jurisdiction over contractual matters if the issue pertains to those items enumerated in section 251 of the 1999 Nigerian Constitution.
