LEGAL PRINCIPLE: EVIDENCE LAW – Public Documents – Certification of Documents at Appellate Stage
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
At the stage when Exhibit Q was annexed to the respondent's counter-affidavit the Court of Appeal was concerned not with the appeal challenging the decision of the trial judge but the application before it for a stay of execution to be granted. Since at that stage Exhibit Q had been certified as true copy of the proceedings in suit No. 0/121m/92, the contention of the appellants about its value as evidence is misdirected and irrelevant to the appeal before us.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Uwais, CJN, in Franchal (Nig.) Ltd. v. N.A.B. Ltd. (2000) NLC-1861994(SC) at pp. 6–7; Paras E–A.
"At the stage when Exhibit Q was annexed to the respondent's counter-affidavit the Court of Appeal was concerned not with the appeal challenging the decision of the trial judge but the application before it for a stay of execution to be granted. Since at that stage Exhibit Q had been certified as true copy of the proceedings in suit No. 0/121m/92, the contention of the appellants about its value as evidence is misdirected and irrelevant to the appeal before us."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
In interlocutory applications (e.g., stay of execution), certified public documents are admissible without the rigorous scrutiny required at trial. The court’s concern at that stage is prima facie proof, not final determination. A certified true copy of court proceedings suffices for interlocutory purposes. Challenges to the document’s evidentiary value are misdirected because the interlocutory context demands only a threshold showing. The strict rules governing admissibility at trial do not apply with equal force to interlocutory applications where the court is preserving the status quo pending appeal.