Effect of a Written Statement on Oath Not Signed and Sworn to Before a Commissioner for Oaths

CASE TITLE: SUMAYE & ANOR v. MAITARKO & ANOR (2025) LPELR-82596(CA)

JUDGMENT DATE: 4TH DECEMBER, 2025

PRACTICE AREA: EVIDENCE

LEAD JUDGMENT: TUNDE OYEBANJI AWOTOYE, J.C.A.

SUMMARY OF JUDGMENT:

INTRODUCTION:

The appeal borders on Civil Procedure.

FACTS:

The appeal is against the decision of the Kebbi State High Court of Justice (trial Court) delivered on 24/06/2021.

The 1st and 2nd Claimants filed their respective suits separately on 9/05/2019. The 1st Claimant’s claim against the defendants reads as follows:

i. “A declaration that the infringement and destruction of the 1st Claimant’s farm by the Defendant’s cattle on the 28th February, 2018, was unlawful, wrongful and an infringement of their right to live freely and carry on their lawful business without interaction.

ii. The sum of N1,560,000.00 in special damages.

iii. N500,000.00 general damages.

iv. Cost of filing this action.”

The 2nd Claimant, via his specially endorsed writ, claims against the Defendant thus:

i. “A declaration that destruction of the 2nd Claimant farms by the Defendant’s cattle on the 28/02/2018 was unlawful, wrongful and an infringement of their right to live freely and carry on their lawful business without interaction.

ii. The sum of N1,867,500.00 as special damages.

iii. N500,000.00 as general damages.

iv. Cost of action.”

The two suits were subsequently consolidated by the order of the Court. The learned trial Judge proceeded to hear the parties. After the said hearing, the learned trial Judge gave judgment in favour of the Claimants, granting their reliefs as prayed.

Dissatisfied with the decision, the Appellants have appealed.

ISSUES FOR DETERMINATION:

The appeal was determined on the Appellants’ issues for determination, thus:

1. Whether the totality of the evidence adduced by the respondents before the trial court has proved their case against the appellants on the balance of probability and preponderance of evidence.

2. Whether the trial court was right in accepting the testimonies of pw1 and pw2 which were basically hearsay evidence.

3. Whether the learned trial judge properly evaluated the evidence led by both parties in arriving at his conclusion.

DECISION/HELD:

The appeal was dismissed.

RATIOS:

• APPEAL- BRIEF OF ARGUMENT: Effect of failure of respondent to file brief of argument in an appeal
• EVIDENCE- WRITTEN STATEMENT ON OATH: Effect of a written statement on oath not signed and sworn to before a Commissioner for Oaths
• EVIDENCE- HEARSAY EVIDENCE: Meaning of hearsay evidence

To read the full judgment or similar judgments, subscribe to Prime or Primsol