For not awarding any cost against Ihedioha means SC has accepted her errors but can't reverse itself.

Congratulations to Governor Hope Uzodimma.

You are right

MelesZenawi:
For not awarding any cost against Ihedioha means SC has accepted her errors but can't reverse itself.

Congratulations to Governor Hope Uzodimma.

How far nah...
You no show on Amotekun thread .

I told you it'll be passed into law

MelesZenawi:
For not awarding any cost against Ihedioha means SC has accepted her errors but can't reverse itself.

Congratulations to Governor Hope Uzodimma.

which errors?

The Supreme court didn't award the fine because one igbo judge saved the lawyers from the East by giving a judgment in favour of them.

They know now but to reverse it would set a precedence that will affect future judgements at the supreme court

accept errors or not, Uzodinma remains imo state Govornor till 2027

Iamgrey5:
which errors?

The Supreme court didn't award the fine because one igbo judge saved the lawyers from the East by giving a judgment in favour of them.

The problem isn't NL...you are the problem.

Iamgrey5:
which errors?

The Supreme court didn't award the fine because one igbo judge saved the lawyers from the East by giving a judgment in favour of them.

Oga, tribalism has blinded you
You now reason with your anus.

.

Staro:


Oga, tribalism has blinded you
You now reason with your anus.

.

How is my statement tribalistic?

The other time some judges started crying like babies in order to appeal to emotions rather than logic to justify the award of an unwaranted fine against some Yoruba lawyers, Some of the best in Nigeria in the past decade.

Even a well known Buhari critic in Farooq Keproogi saw through the gimmick

Why wasn't the same treatment given to the other lawyers today?

fergie001:
The problem isn't NL...you are the problem.

Ok

Iamgrey5:
How is my statement tribalistic?

The other time some judges started crying like babies in order to appeal to emotions rather than logic to justify the award of an unwaranted fine against some Yoruba lawyers, Some of the best in Nigeria in the past decade.

Even a well known Buhari critic in Farooq Keproogi saw through the gimmick

Why wasn't the same treatment given to the other lawyers today?

Yorubas and Igbos no be samething.

Are we brothers to receive same treatment.

MelesZenawi:



Yorubas and Igbos no be samething.

Are we brothers to receive same treatment.

Abi

The outcome of the cases were similar.


According to Supreme Court, Both failed to point to a technical error in the previous judgment.

But at least, The Bayelsa Apc lawyers tried to make a case for human error in the previous judgment, but the PDP Imo lawyers tried to bring up new issues so that supreme court will start sitting on an appeal of a case previous decided.

So who is more worthy of a fine?

DO YOU NEED A WEBSITE FOR YOUR BUSINESS ..LETS MEET AND TALK ABOUT YOUR BUSINESS WEBSITE THAT YOU NEED

www.nairaland.com/attachments/11146752_whatsappimage20200206at11_53_58amcopycopy6copy_jpeg_jpega46b678055584d91363080529f4396c1

Iamgrey5:
Abi

The outcome of the cases were similar.


According to Supreme Court, Both failed to point to a technical error in the previous judgment.

But at least, The Bayelsa Apc lawyers tried to make a case for human error in the previous judgment, but the PDP Imo lawyers tried to bring up new issues so that supreme court will start sitting on an appeal of a case previous decided.

So who is more worthy of a fine?

please I no get your time.

Tomorrow u go say I am educated

Iamgrey5:
Abi
The outcome of the cases were similar.
According to Supreme Court, Both failed to point to a technical error in the previous judgment.
But at least, The Bayelsa Apc lawyers tried to make a case for human error in the previous judgment, but the PDP Imo lawyers tried to bring up new issues so that supreme court will start sitting on an appeal of a case previous decided.
So who is more worthy of a fine?

You are passionate about this fine for reasons best known to you but I need you to take out emotions and calm down.

No two cases are the same. The case of Bayelsa was thrashed excitingly well here some weeks ago. Legally, Degi had no case as the error(s) had been made by his lawyers from the lower court and he showed an aptitude for been chameleonic. Section 187(1) and (2) of the 1999 Constitution (as ammended) also made his case affect Lyon.

If you want to be honest, Uncle Wole and Aare didn't quote any technical (or human) error, they only based on the fact that the lower court was silent on certain prayers that the SC upheld. Judicial precedent can tell us that the FHC judgement isn't binding on the SC. We have dealt with this extensively in the last few weeks.

In the case of Imo, there are clear errors pointed out. I support the SC's stance on not reviewing it (because it will call for ceaseless litigations) but they could have sought a way to correct inter alia some fascinating lacuna in their judgement.

1)The issue of spread which Hope and ultimately Ihedioha didn't enjoy as enshrined in Section 179(2) of the 1999 Constitution (as ammended).

2) The issue of valid votes higher than the number of accredited voters.

The judgement is for all ages, and this is going to be a big problem for INEC as the Edo and Ondo elections beckon.

Lawyers will seize every opportunity to quote and link this judgement, politicians as well aren't fools. Since the SC has legitimised it( so to speak), win at all costs with or without credence to any of the two reasons above.

The Omehia/Amaechi case is an example where the SC had to reverse itself 11 years later. This judgement post-2023, will judiciously die permanently.

Their thinking is let us allow all parties lick their wounds, and let's move on.

For the fine...following the uproar, it will be unearthing pandora box.

...Iamgrey5, let's move on, ok?

senatordave1 dansuqi kahal29 ejimatic amaniro Agboriotejoye lostz losC ChristianNorth, are we together?

fergie001:

You are passionate about this fine for reasons best known to you but I need you to take out emotions and calm down.

No two cases are the same. The case of Bayelsa was thrashed excitingly well here some weeks ago. Legally, Degi had no case as the error(s) had been made by his lawyers from the lower court and he showed an aptitude for been chameleonic. Section 187(1) and (2) also made his case affect Lyon.

If you want to be honest, Uncle Wole and Aare didn't quote any technical (or human) error, they only based on the fact that the lower court was silent on certain prayers that the SC upheld. Judicial precedent can tell us that the FHC judgement isn't binding on the SC. We have dealt with this extensively in the last few weeks.

In the case of Imo, there are clear errors pointed out. I support the SC's stance on not reviewing it (because it will call for ceaseless litigations) but they could have sought a way to correct inter alia some fascinating lacuna in their judgement.

1)The issue of spread which Hope and ultimately Ihedioha didn't enjoy as enshrined in Section 179(2) of the 1999 Constitution (as ammended).

2) The issue of valid votes higher than the number of accredited voters.

The judgement is for all ages, and this is going to be a big problem for INEC as the Edo and Ondo elections beckon. Lawyers will seize every opportunity to quote and link this judgement. Politicians aren't fools. Since the SC has legitimised it( so to speak), win at all costs with or without credence to any of the two reasons above.

The Omehia/Amaechi case is an example where the SC had to reverse itself 11 years later. This judgement post-2023, will judiciously die permanently.

Their thinking is let us allow all parties lick their wounds, and let's move on.

For the fine...following the uproar, it will be unearthing pandora box.

...Iamgrey5, let's move on, ok?

dansuqi kahal29 ejimatic amaniro Agboriotejoye lostz losC ChristianNorth, are we together?

I already accepted the supreme Court judgement. I hope APC won't cry when another party use this new precedent against them

Lostz:
I already accepted the supreme Court judgement. I hope APC won't cry when another party use this new precedent against them

. I accept the supreme court judgement especially when no financial implication is on the appellant unlike in Bayelsa.In my opinion aggrieved party has the right to appeal for a review .It is not an aberration in law and neither it is forbidden in the law.The SC also reserves the right to strike it out as it did on Bayelsa and IMO cases.Additionally the concern of the SC in those cases is the protection of the sanctity of the SC on judicial dispensation even if there are overt or covert imbalance, errors ,and irregularities in it

I accept the supreme court judgement especially when no financial implication is on the appellant unlike in Bayelsa.In my opinion aggrieved party has the right to appeal for a review .It is not an aberration in law and neither it is forbidden in the law.The SC also reserves the right to strike it out as it did on Bayelsa and IMO cases.Additionally the concern of the SC in those cases is the protection of the sanctity of the SC in judicial dispensation even if there are overt or covert imbalance, errors ,and irregularities in it

fergie001:

You are passionate about this fine for reasons best known to you but I need you to take out emotions and calm down.

No two cases are the same. The case of Bayelsa was thrashed excitingly well here some weeks ago. Legally, Degi had no case as the error(s) had been made by his lawyers from the lower court and he showed an aptitude for been chameleonic. Section 187(1) and (2) of the 1999 Constitution (as ammended) also made his case affect Lyon.

If you want to be honest, Uncle Wole and Aare didn't quote any technical (or human) error, they only based on the fact that the lower court was silent on certain prayers that the SC upheld. Judicial precedent can tell us that the FHC judgement isn't binding on the SC. We have dealt with this extensively in the last few weeks.

In the case of Imo, there are clear errors pointed out. I support the SC's stance on not reviewing it (because it will call for ceaseless litigations) but they could have sought a way to correct inter alia some fascinating lacuna in their judgement.

1)The issue of spread which Hope and ultimately Ihedioha didn't enjoy as enshrined in Section 179(2) of the 1999 Constitution (as ammended).

2) The issue of valid votes higher than the number of accredited voters.

The judgement is for all ages, and this is going to be a big problem for INEC as the Edo and Ondo elections beckon.

Lawyers will seize every opportunity to quote and link this judgement, politicians as well aren't fools. Since the SC has legitimised it( so to speak), win at all costs with or without credence to any of the two reasons above.

The Omehia/Amaechi case is an example where the SC had to reverse itself 11 years later. This judgement post-2023, will judiciously die permanently.

Their thinking is let us allow all parties lick their wounds, and let's move on.

For the fine...following the uproar, it will be unearthing pandora box.

...Iamgrey5, let's move on, ok?

senatordave1 dansuqi kahal29 ejimatic amaniro Agboriotejoye lostz losC ChristianNorth, are we together?

Two cases can be the same. According to Glanvile Williams Definition of precedence, states that precedence is following previous decisions where the facts are the same. If Musa stole a car In someone's compound in 2008 and Ebere stole a car too in someone compound in 2020.They are the same Case, their facts are the same so the same punishment that applied to Musa is the same that'll apply to Ebere (unless the constitution was amended within those years) if not its the same case. But, That of Baylesa and Imo are two different Cases! The verdict was not even the same and that's how it's supposed to be.

MelesZenawi:
For not awarding any cost against Ihedioha means SC has accepted her errors but can't reverse itself.

Congratulations to Governor Hope Uzodimma.

Are you still in apga or apdp

amaniro:


Two cases can be the same. According to Glanvile Williams Definition of precedence, states that precedence is following previous decisions where the facts are the same. If Musa stole a car In someone's compound in 2008 and Ebere stole a car too in someone compound in 2020.They are the same Case, their facts are the same so the same punishment that applied to Musa is the same that'll apply to Ebere (unless the constitution was amended within those years) if not its the same case. But, That of Baylesa and Imo are two different Cases! The verdict was not even the same and that's how it's supposed to be.

My bro....calm down!

When I mean no two cases are the same refer to the applications entered by the lawyers. This Bayelsa connundrum would have been averted if APC had used an experienced lawyer.

APC fell into the hands of the PDP. I saw the written addresses and can tell you if some big lawyers had handled Bayelsa case...APC would have won.

So, the essence of those writing the addresses cannot be overemphasised, I have seen loopholes already I can challenge you with based on the example of Musa and Ebere.

How did Musa steal the car?
How did Ebere steal the car?

Musa is an alibi who necessarily didn't steal the car but have entered an agreement with someone who had been a fake agent. He is a victim of circumstance.

Musa works legitimately and was fooled into it.

Hope you und?

Iamgrey5:
which errors?

The Supreme court didn't award the fine because one igbo judge saved the lawyers from the East by giving a judgment in favour of them.

SMH..... Wisdom is far away from your dwelling

fergie001:


My bro....calm down!

When I mean no two cases are the same refer to the applications entered by the lawyers. This Bayelsa connundrum would have been averted if APC had used an experienced lawyer.

APC fell into the hands of the PDP. I saw the written addresses and can tell you if some big lawyers had handled Bayelsa case...APC would have won

So, the essence of those writing the addresses cannot be overemphasised, I have seen loopholes already I can challenge you with based on the example of Musa and Ebere.

How did Musa steal the car?
How did Ebere steal the car?

Musa is an alibi who necessarily didn't steal the car but have entered an agreement with someone who had been a fake agent. He is a victim of circumstance.

Musa works legitimately and was fooled into it.

Hope you und?

Understand this:Dont let anybody fool you the tactics of winning a case or giving a case a Good fight is by proving all your evidences beyond all reasonable doubt with Legal Rethorics. Big Lawyers don't have any effect if they can't win a case. Ohh yeah! Who was Lyon's lawyer again in the court? The Almighty Afe Babalola Senior Advocate of Nigeria and Olanipekun. Those two are in the senior leagues of Lawyers but they ended up paying fine at the end Get a good lawyer not a big lawyer..




About Ebere and Musa, That's just and example. No matter if Musa stole Highlander 2020 and Ebere stole Mercedes E 230 . According to the criminal code they'll serve the same term else it will be injustice, Lé comprehendé?

amaniro:


Understand this:Dont let anybody fool you the tactics of winning a case or giving a case a Good fight is by proving all your evidences beyond all reasonable doubt with Legal Rethorics. Big Lawyers don't have any effect if they can't win a case. Ohh yeah! Who was Lyon's lawyer again in the court? The Almighty Afe Babalola Senior Advocate of Nigeria and Olanipekun. Those two are in the senior leagues of Lawyers but they ended up paying fine at the end Get a good lawyer not a big lawyer.

You are mixing it up....

You prove your evidence and don't fall into the trap of your rival.

Afe Babalola and Olanipekun, only came in after the SC judgement, just like Agabi didn't handle the Imo case but only came in after the SC judgement.

Everyone knows Ikpeazu (SAN) and election cases, he is a master. But when it came to review, they brought in Agabi..big name.

Aare and Uncle Wole need no introduction. Aare last came to court over a decade ago. When you are big, you are big.

The lawyer that handled the Bayelsa case isn't even a SAN. He is one young man that Yustaz Usman (SAN)(the PDP lawyer) outshadowed.

There are certain cases, you need a big lawyer. You must be good before you are big.

When the matter is up, it can be tackled. Ask yourself why the Court upheld the affidavit of Muhammadu and Mohammed of Buhari .....thereby adjusting Section 177 and using the same affidavit to punish Degi.

What you write and argue can go a long way.

fergie001:

You are mixing it up....

You prove your evidence and don't fall into the trap of your rival.

Afe Babalola and Olanipekun, only came in after the SC judgement, just like Agabi didn't handle the Imo case but only came in after the SC judgement.

The lawyer that handled the Bayelsa case isn't even a SAN. He is one young man that Yustaz Usman (SAN)(the PDP lawyer) outshadowed.

There are certain cases, you need a big lawyer. You must be good before you are big.

First of The Case of Ebere and Musa is Doctrine of Judicial precedence, it is an example from Gllavile Williams. As I stated earlier, yes you are meant to prove your evidence beyond all reasonable doubt. I said this I dont know why I'm repeating this. Once again I'll Tell you no matter if Jesus was the lawyer that handled Baylesa case, he will lose the case. Because first of all it was a review and a review don't mean Supreme Court will change its mind. It can hardly overturn situations or verdict it has previously dealt with. You don't just understand the aspect I'm coming from. Get a good lawyer not a Big lawyer

and Bleep lol you expect me to read all those this night? Nah my hands are paining me

fergie001:

You are mixing it up....

You prove your evidence and don't fall into the trap of your rival.

Afe Babalola and Olanipekun, only came in after the SC judgement, just like Agabi didn't handle the Imo case but only came in after the SC judgement.

Everyone knows Ikpeazu (SAN) and election cases, he is a master. But when it came to review, they brought in Agabi..big name.

Aare and Uncle Wole need no introduction. Aare last came to court over a decade ago. When you are big, you are big.

The lawyer that handled the Bayelsa case isn't even a SAN. He is one young man that Yustaz Usman (SAN)(the PDP lawyer) outshadowed.

There are certain cases, you need a big lawyer. You must be good before you are big.

When the matter is up, it can be tackled. Ask yourself why the Court upheld the affidavit of Muhammadu and Mohammed of Buhari .....thereby adjusting Section 177 and using the same affidavit to punish Degi.

What you write and argue can go a long way.

Nah una sabi sha with all those una political wahala. I'm not a political thinker or a political lawyer

amaniro:



First of The Case of Ebere and Musa is Doctrine of Judicial precedence, it is an example from Gllavile Williams. As I stated earlier, yes you are meant to prove your evidence beyond all reasonable doubt. I said this I dont know why I'm repeating this. Once again I'll Tell you no matter if Jesus was the lawyer that handled Baylesa case, he will lose the case. Because first of all it was a review and a review don't mean Supreme Court will change its mind. It can hardly overturn situations or verdict it has previously dealt with. You don't just understand the aspect I'm coming from. Get a good lawyer not a Big lawyer

Understand me.

The primary case, I mean the written submissions before it went to the Supreme Court was weak from the APC angle. The SC based on that to give judgement against APC.

Try and get the submissions of the APC lawyer, you can see the weaknesses even if you aren't a lawyer. I have all this 'cos my roommate back at school works in the Chamber of one of the lawyers that won. They played into the PDP's hands.

Degi had a bad case, but a better lawyer would have turned it in his favour.

I am not talking about the review.

Get a good lawyer, but there are certain cases that warrant a big lawyer. When you get to those cases, you will know.

amaniro:


Nah una sabi sha with all those una political wahala. I'm not a political thinker or a political lawyer

That's what am telling you. I posted the full judgement on NL here.

It made fp, you can trace and read the submissions.

fergie001:

Understand me.

The primary case, I mean the written submissions before it went to the Supreme Court was weak from the APC angle. The SC based on that to give judgement against APC.

Try and get the submissions of the APC lawyer, you can see the weaknesses even if you aren't a lawyer. I have all this 'cos my roommateat school works in the Chamber of one of the lawyers that won. They played into the PDP's hands.

I am not talking about the review.

Get a good lawyer, but there are certain cases that warrant a big lawyer. When you get to those cases, you will know.

Finally we're on the same page! It was a very weak call for review from the APC. They just played the ball into PDP hands.

amaniro:


Finally we're on the same page! It was a very weak call for review from the APC. They just played the ball into PDP hands.

Their case from even the HC was weak.

We are not arguing that. They went for the review, only to preserve Imo. They knew there was no case.

fergie001:

That's what am telling you. I posted the full judgement on NL here.

It made fp, you can trace and read the submissions.

Hmm you know I've not been active On Nairaland is just recently. And I'll be going back into Oblivion soon