LEGAL PRINCIPLE: EVIDENCE LAW — Pleadings — Cross-Examination on Unpleaded Facts
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
Evidence led during cross-examination on issues joined is not inadmissible merely because such evidence is not supported by the pleading of the party eliciting the evidence. As long as the issue is properly raised in the pleadings, cross-examination on that issue is permissible even if the specific fact is not pleaded.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Edozie, JSC (adopting Karibi-Whyte, JSC in Bamgboye v. Olanrewaju), in Gaji & Ors v. Paye (2003) NLC-4099(SC) at p. 9; Paras A–D.
"It seems to me consistent with principle that evidence led during cross-examination on issues joined is not inadmissible, merely because such evidence is not supported by the pleading of the party eliciting the evidence. For instance, in the instant case, although the defendants did not plead the fact that all the sections of the Okesan family had a common ancestor, the reference to the fact that they were all of the same family by paragraph 6 of the statement of claim was sufficient for the admission of any evidence establishing or negating that fact. And this is so whether on cross-examination."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Cross-examination on unpleaded specific facts is admissible if the issue is generally raised in the pleadings. The principle applies to all civil trials. The opposing party is on notice of the general issue. The rule prevents technical exclusion of relevant evidence. The court will consider the substance of the pleadings. The principle is well-established.