CASE: Ania v Emodi

Facts of the case:

The appellants as plaintiffs filed two individual cases in the Chief Magistrate’s Court, against the respondent as defendant in respect of contiguous lands each claiming a declaration of title, damages and injunction: The two cases were consolidated by the magistrate.

After taking the evidence of the parties and their witnesses and hearing address of counsel the learned trial magistrate gave judgment for the appellants. In his judgment, he tried to summarize the evidence of the witnesses for the appellants and thereafter he took up the evidence of the respondent, castigating it and demolishing it. In the process he said thus;

“I have dealt exhaustively on the weakness of the case of the defendant and after analyzing the defendant’s case I am satisfied that there is no substance in the defendant’s case and equally satisfied that the defendant has no land at all in the area.”

The learned trial Magistrate then noted that nevertheless in an action for declaration of title the burden of proof was on the plaintiff. Having said this he proceeded to deal in extension with the evidence of the appellants to which he attained all the probative value. Being dissatisfied with the judgment the respondent appealed to the High Court.

In his judgment, the appellate High Court Judge criticized the judgment of the trial Magistrate for demolishing the defence before giving any consideration to the appellant case. The learned Judge gave his judgment in two installments. Firsthe allowed the appeal and set aside the judgment of the trial magistrate.

He then invited counsel to address on whether the proper order to make in respect of the claims of the appellants was an order of dismissal or of non-suit. When counsel addressed him, he dismissed the two suits filed by the appellants. Being dissatisfied with the judgment, the appellants appealed to the Court of Appeal.

SEE ALSO: Case: Ataguba & Co. V Gura Nig. Ltd. (2005)

Held: (Unanimously allowing the Appeal and ordering a re trial):

1. On Duty of trial court in evaluating evidence –
A trial court in the course of evaluating evidence, must have at the back of its mind, the evidential rules governing the burden of proof.