This Act repeals the Evidence Act, Cap. E14, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, and enacts a new Evidence Act, which applies to all judicial proceedings in . This Act repeals the Evidence Act, Cap. E14, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, and enacts a new Evidence Act, which applies to all. Full advanced text search, for sections and keywords. Evidence Act , Laws of the Federation of Nigeria. This Act repeals the Evidence Act, Cap. E14, Laws.

Nigerian Evidence Act 2011 Pdf

Language:English, Portuguese, Japanese
Genre:Science & Research
Published (Last):19.08.2016
ePub File Size:22.70 MB
PDF File Size:11.10 MB
Distribution:Free* [*Registration Required]
Uploaded by: ROSALINDA

About this republication. The republished law. This is a republication of the Evidence Act (including any amendment made under the. Legislation Act EVIDENCE ACT, EXPLANATORY ME MORANDUM This Act repeals the Evidence Act, Cap. E14, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, and enacts a new. EVIDENCE. THE EVIDENCE ACT. 1. This Act may be cited as the Evidence Act. Cap. Laws. 22 of ,. 31 of S. Acts. 40 of 42 of

Law of Evidence I Course Code: LAW Course Facilitator: Onyekachi Wisdom Duru Esq. Definitions of the Law of Evidence The Law of Evidence is concerned principally with what and how facts or materials are admissible in order to prove something that is in dispute.

The Law of Evidence relates to the proof of facts before the court and this involves; a who may prove a fact; b how facts may be proved, and c what facts may not be proved in a court of law.

Thus, Evidence is the foundation of proof. McKelvey excludes methods of proof; He admits only the actual facts proved. Presumption is part of evidence in law and in fact as we shall see later. Accordingly, his is the best definition.

Nigerian Evidence Act Update

Take Notice that in both civil and criminal trials in the Court, the Law of Evidence directs how a trial may be conducted and the issues usually involve: Calling witnesses, b. Which witness or witnesses to call, c. Which questions may be asked, d. Which questions may not be asked and if asked may not be answered, e.

Statements of person who are not called, which may or may not be excluded, f. Which fact or facts require or does not require proof by proving some other facts and how to prove it, h.

Inference that may be legitimate from given fact s and situation s , i. What facts may not be proved e. What evidence is relevant. Judicial Evidence Judicial evidence, according to Nokes, consists of: The facts that are legally admissible include; a facts in issue, b hearsay, except where it is forbidden or excluded, c opinion of experts, d evidence of character, except where it is excluded or forbidden; and e privilege where it is applicable.

On the other hand, the legal means by which facts may be proved include; a witness es , that is to say, oral evidence, b oaths or affirmation, c documents, d formal admissions or confession; and, e corroboration. Additionally, there are other special means of proving facts. These are; a Judicial Notice and b Presumption of facts 1. The Courts that apply the Law of Evidence This segment tries to answer the question whether the Evidence Act applies in all the courts?

For example should the customary courts or the Area or native courts including District Courts be bound to comply with the Evidence Act in the proceedings before them? In other words, the Evidence Act applies to all judicial proceedings in or before any court established in the Federal Republic of Nigeria but it shall not apply to a Proceedings before an arbitrator; or b Field General Court Martial.

The foregoing analysis may be summarized as follows: For examples; Rules as to burden of proof and standard of proof are mandatory in all judicial proceedings, where the Evidence Act applies. Substantive Law is a generic term, which covers such areas of law as tort, contract; crime etc.

It is the law that defines legal rights, duties and liabilities. Examples are: The Criminal Code, and The Penal code. Procedural Law also called Adjectival Law is the law which prescribes the process by which substantive law is lifted from the statute book and applied in practice. It regulates the prosecution of offenders or civil litigation and how the facts upon which rights, duties, liabilities may be founded are established in the courts. Therefore, Evidence is a branch of procedural law.

The Law of Evidence is unique in that it applies to all branches of law. Generally, you can say that the Law of Evidence derives from the following: The rules from this source may be legal but they are not authoritative.

There are persuasive only. A formal source gives validity to the law.

Evidence (law)

It is also in the nature of the ill and common consciousness of the people of Nigeria; c Material Source. This may be i Historical: Writings of distinguished learned writers. They are of persuasive authority or ii Legal; the laws which the law per se recognizes. Examples are statutes, judicial precedents, etc; d Authoritative and binding sources. This refers to the origin of legal rules and principles, namely: The legislature, which through legislations, brings into existence, received and local statutes.

The courts which through authoritative judicial decisions, create judicial precedents, example common law, doctrines of Equity and local precedents, as well as customs. Historical Development of Law of Evidence The Law of Evidence in Nigeria originates as well as derives its authority from the following: This idea functions as an integrated structure, which the members of the pertinent society mutually and voluntarily agree to and accept as their norms, rules, and values, which should be uniformly respected.

It denies that the society is ever consensual, but conflict and competitive. Accordingly, conflict theory argues that laws are a dictate of the wealthy and powerful elite, and they make laws only to perpetuate their positions and class interests. The better view is that the Laws are the handiwork of the legislators who are your elected representatives.

They exercise the political and legal powers of the state but not necessarily to protect their positions, statues or class interests. None of the theories is completely valid or wholly invalid. Each has its merit and deficiencies.

Evidence (law)

The same conclusion is true of any legal system in any part of the world. Origin of the Law of Evidence 2. Pre-Colonial Era The pre-colonial rules of evidence, applied in pre-colonial settlements, Empires and Kingdoms which now constitute Nigeria they were: The Moslem Law of the Maliki School. This law applied in Islamic areas and Courts in those areas. It is a written law. The Customary Law. It is either wholly unwritten or part written. Common Law of England 2.

Doctrines of Equity 3. Statutes of General Application 4. Laws specifically enacted for the Colony of Lagos. The English —type courts, were set up to enforce and administer these laws. Examples of such courts are: The Consular Court and 2. The Equity Court. Prior to , the Received Law and native laws and customs co-existed, and were sources of Nigerian law including the Law of Evidence.

The Ordinance No. They permitted local laws and customs, which were neither repugnant to natural justice, equity and good conscience nor incompatible with local statutes.

Thus this has changed the nature of examination in chief. Now the witness may be called upon only to adopt his witness statement on oath and make a few clarifications on it where needed. There are three types of examination of witnesses provided for under the Evidence Act, which can be seen under section and they are: The examination of a witness by the party who calls him shall be called examination-in-chief.

The examination of a witness by a party other than the party who calls him shall be called cross-examination. Where a witness has been cross-examined and is then examined by the party who called him, such examination shall be called re-examination.

Section of the Act further clarifies on the issue of the order and direction of examination, by stating in the following sub sections: Witnesses shall be first examined-in-chief, then if any other party so desires, cross-examined, then if the party that called him so desires, re-examined.

The examination and cross-examination must relate to relevant facts, but the cross-examination need not be confined to the facts to which the witness testified on his examination-in-chief. The re-examination shall be directed to the explanation of matters referred in cross-examination and if a new matter is, by permission of the court, introduced, in re-examination, the adverse party may further cross-examine that matter.

The uttermost aim of examination-in-chief is to elicit from the witness, in logical order, facts relevant to prove the case of the party that called him. Thus as a prerequisite, the manner in which the questions are asked and how they are answered must comply with the rules of relevancy and admissibility of evidence.

In conducting an examination-in-chief, the process would usual start with easy background questions with a bid to get the witness to relax and get used to testifying in the courtroom environment.

You might also like: ACTIVE LISTENING BOOK

It is very important that evidence-in-chief is given in the words of the witness himself and not of the examiner. That is why leading questions are not permitted in examination-in-chief and re-examination. Section explains what amounts to a leading question thus: Any question suggesting the answer which the person putting it wishes or expects to receive is called a leading question.

Leading question shall not be asked in examination-in-chief or in re-examination, except with the permission of the court. The court shall permit leading questions as to matters which are introductory or undisputed, or which have in its opinion, been already sufficiently proved. Leading questions may be asked in cross-examination. The judge has the discretion whether or not to allow a leading question; and where it is refused, the question should be rephrased.

The description of Nigerian Evidence Act

Certain exemptions do exist to the prohibition of leading questions and these are found under section 3 Evidence Act: Introductory matters- names, addresses, occupation etc.

Undisputed matters in the course of proceedings. Matters sufficiently proved in evidence. Cross-examination Section 2 of the Evidence Act, states that the examination of a witness by a party other than the party who calls him is cross-examination.

See the case of Amadi v. Section of the Act provides the purpose of cross-examining a witness; it states that when a witness is cross-examined, he may be asked any question which tend to: Test his accuracy, veracity or credibility; or Discover who he is and what is his position I life; or Shake his credit by injuring his character. Upon further consideration of the procedure in cross-examining a witness, we see the provisions in section 1 which states a statutory restriction on cross-examination as to credit by injuring the character of the witness.Other types of evidentiary rules specify the standards of persuasion e.

Second, in Hollington v. Entries in books of accounts or electronic records regularly kept in the course of business arc admissible whenever they refer to a matter into which the COUli has to inquire.

Presumption as to telegraphic and electronic messages. B case that the admission of the bank statements which entries were derived from the day-to-day vouchers of the Respondent bank did not qualify, without other supporting oral evidence, as a bankers book and therefore offended the provisions of Section 96 1 h of the Evidence Act.

Proper custody defined. Evidence as to matters in writing. Examples of electronic devises are television, remote control, computers, keyboards, mice, and anything that plugs into USB, DVR, electrically powered alarm clocks, smart and dumb watches, stereo system, automobile engine, computers, etc [7] Digital devise is defined as a physical unit of equipment that contains a computer or micro controller. Amendment and rc- swearing 0[" affidavu. Therefore, significant time should be devoted to identifying and analysing the authentication and admissibility issues relative to the electronic data involved in the litigation.