LEGAL PRINCIPLE: CIVIL PROCEDURE — Trial — Judgment on Evidence Recorded by Another Judge — Constitutes a Mistrial and Nullity
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
It is palpably wrong for one judge to write a judgment on evidence recorded by another judge; a trial must be conducted by the judge himself, and judgment must be based on evidence he received and recorded.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Mohammed, JSC, in Eghobamien v. Federal Mortgage Bank of Nigeria (2002) NLC-1191997(SC) at pp. 7–8; Paras D–A.
"It is palpably wrong to write a judgment on the evidence recorded by another Judge. A trial is a judicial examination of evidence according to the law of the land, given before the court after hearing parties and their witnesses. A trial must be conducted by the Judge himself and at the end of the hearing he will write a judgment which is the authentic decision based on the evidence he received and recorded. It is a mistrial for one Judge to receive evidence and another to write judgment on it."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
A trial judge must personally hear the evidence and write the judgment. Judgment written by a different judge on evidence recorded by another constitutes a mistrial and nullity. The principle ensures that the decision-maker has the advantage of seeing and hearing witnesses. The judge who writes the judgment must have had the opportunity to assess credibility. The rule is fundamental to fair hearing. A successor judge cannot write judgment on evidence heard by a predecessor. The proceedings are void ab initio. The remedy is a retrial before a properly constituted court. The principle protects the integrity of judicial proceedings.
