CaseLaw
Okafor V. Okpala (1995) CLR 2 (D) (CA)
Brief
Facts
Appellant sued respondent seeking orders of specific performance of an alleged contract and injunction.
Trial commenced and during evidence appellant said a letter was written to respondent (Exhibit A) and when the respondent received the letter, she replied through her then solicitor (Exhibit B). Appellant then continued with and concluded evidence in chief. The Matter was then adjourned.
Trial commenced and during evidence appellant said a letter was written to respondent (Exhibit A) and when the respondent received the letter, she replied through her then solicitor (Exhibit B). Appellant then continued with and concluded evidence in chief. The Matter was then adjourned.
Upon resumption, Respondents counsel moved a motion praying court for an order to expunge Exhibit B from the courts record since according to them it could not be properly admitted in evidence except it was tendered by the maker. Trial Judge ordered Exhibit B expunged from the records.
Appellant dissatisfied appealed. Respondent raised a preliminary objection to the competency of the appeal on the ground that the issue involved being one of mixed law and fact, the appellant ought to have obtained leave of the High court or Appeal Court.