LEGAL PRINCIPLE: EVIDENCE LAW — Admissibility of Evidence — Failure to Object at Trial
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
When inadmissible evidence is tendered, it is the duty of the opposite party to object immediately. A distinction must be drawn between evidence absolutely inadmissible (cannot be acted upon even by consent) and evidence admissible under certain conditions (admissible if admitted without objection).
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Ogundare, JSC, in Kossen (Nig.) Limited & Anor v. Savannah Bank of Nigeria Limited (1995) NLC-2091989(SC).
"When, however, inadmissible evidence is tendered it is the duty of the opposite (or adverse) party or his counsel to object immediately to the admissibility of such evidence... In a trial by a Judge alone... a distinction must be drawn between those cases where the evidence complained of is in no circumstances admissible in law and where the evidence complained of is admissible under certain conditions. In the former class of cases the evidence cannot be acted upon even if parties admitted it by consent... in the latter class of case, if the evidence was admitted in the lower court without objection or by consent of parties or was used by the opposite party... then it would be within the competence of the trial court to act on it and the court of appeal will not entertain any complaint on the admissibility of such evidence."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Failure to object to evidence at trial may waive the right to challenge it on appeal. However, absolutely inadmissible evidence cannot be made admissible by consent. The distinction is critical. The principle applies to all trials. The party must object promptly. The appellate court will consider the nature of the evidence. The rule promotes efficiency and prevents tactical ambush. The court will not allow parties to sleep on their rights.