LEGAL PRINCIPLE: EVIDENCE LAW — Contradictions in Evidence — Materiality of Contradictions
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
Witnesses may not always speak with equal and regimented accuracy. However, contradictions should not be material to the extent that they cast serious doubts on the case as a whole or on the reliability of such witnesses.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Akintan, JSC, in Ogun v. Akinyelu & Ors (2004) NLC-2071999(SC) at pp. 22–23; Paras E–A.
"The position in law is that in normal course of events, it is to be expected that witness may not always speak of the same facts or events with equal and regimented accuracy. ... But the principle, as recognised by the courts, is that the contradictions by witnesses should not be material to the extent that they cast serious doubts on the case presented as a whole by the party or as to the reliability of such witnesses."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Minor inconsistencies in witness testimony are expected and do not destroy credibility. Contradictions must be material, casting serious doubt on the whole case or witness reliability. The principle applies to evidence law. The court distinguishes between minor discrepancies and material contradictions. Immaterial contradictions are ignored. Material contradictions warrant rejection of testimony.
