WHETHER THE PRINCIPLE OF LAST SEEN APPLIES WHERE THE CAUSE OF DEATH IS KNOWN?

-

WHETHER THE PRINCIPLE OF LAST SEEN APPLIES WHERE THE CAUSE OF DEATH IS KNOWN? 

by Branham Chima. 
Subscribe: https://branhamchima.substack.com/embed 

✓ DEFINITION(S): 
Principle of last seen: also known as the doctrine of last seen, is a legal concept that holds that the person who was last seen with a deceased individual bears full responsibility for their death. This principle is often applied in cases where there is no direct eyewitness testimony to the events leading to the death.

The doctrine of last seen is based on the idea that the person who was last seen with the deceased is in the best position to explain what happened and may have crucial information about the circumstances surrounding the death. It is considered a piece of circumstantial evidence that can be used to establish guilt in criminal cases. 

✓ ANSWER: 
No. It does not. The principle applies where there is no explanation from the person last seen with the deceased as to the cause of death or whereabout of the deceased. 

Hear the Court in Njoku v. The State (2012) thus: ‘also, the reliance on the principle of last seen by the lower court is not supported by the facts and applicable law. The principle is usually invoked where there is no explanation as to what happened to or caused the death of a deceased last seen in company of the accused except the accused explains to the satisfaction of the court what really happened or caused the death of the said deceased. The principle does not apply to a case where the cause of death is known as in the instant case. It is not disputed that the acts of the appellants caused the death of the deceased but what is in contention is whether appellants intended by their admitted action, to kill the deceased.’ 

Comments

Post a Comment

What are your thoughts?

Popular posts from this blog

WHEN IS AN APPEAL DEEMED ENTERED AT THE COURT OF APPEAL?

-
WHEN IS AN APPEAL DEEMED ENTERED AT THE COURT OF APPEAL? by Branham Chima. Subscribe: https://branhamchima.substack.com/embed An appeal is considered to be officially submitted to the Court of Appeal when the records of the previous court’s proceedings are received by the Court of Appeal. Once an appeal has been submitted and until it is finally resolved, the Court of Appeal will have control over the entire case between the involved parties. Unless stated otherwise in the Rules, all applications related to the case must be made to the Court of Appeal and not to the original trial Court. However, it is possible to file an application in the trial Court for it to be transferred to the Court of Appeal. The above position was encapsulated in the National Industrial Court case of Ayangbade v. UBA (NICN/YL/05M/2020, 9th February 2021) per Kado J. thus: ‘the counsel for the judgment creditor/respondent has also contended that no appeal has been entered before the court of appeal. Let m...
Read more

WHETHER CONFLICTING FACTS CAN BE PLEADED WHERE ALTERNATIVE RELIEFS ARE SOUGHT?

-
WHETHER CONFLICTING FACTS CAN BE PLEADED WHERE ALTERNATIVE RELIEFS ARE SOUGHT?  by Branham Chima.  ✓ DEFINITION(S):  • Conflicting facts: refer to contradictory or opposing pieces of information or evidence that are presented. It occurs when different sources, perspectives, or accounts provide inconsistent or conflicting details about a specific matter or issue.  • Pleaded: When a person pleads, they are presenting their case or defense to the court, either admitting or denying the allegations against them. The plea can be made orally or in writing, depending on the jurisdiction and the specific circumstances of the legal proceedings. The term "pleaded" is commonly used to describe the past action of making a plea.  • Alternative reliefs: refer to different forms of remedies or outcomes that a party seeks in a legal proceeding as alternatives to each other. By seeking alternative reliefs, a party acknowledges that there may be multiple ways to address their conc...
Read more

OBITER DICTA OF THE ULTIMATE COURT ON IMPORTANT POINTS ARE BINDING ON LOWER COURT

-
OBITER DICTA OF THE ULTIMATE COURT ON IMPORTANT POINTS ARE BINDING ON LOWER COURT by Branham Chima.  Subscribe: https://branhamchima.substack.com/embed  Obiter dictum, or incidental remarks by a judge that are not binding, play an important role in legal opinions. Generally, lower courts are not obligated to follow obiter dictum. However, there is an exception: when the ultimate court makes an obiter dictum on an important point of law, it becomes binding and must be followed by all lower courts. This exception ensures consistency and uniformity in the interpretation and application of the law across the judicial hierarchy.  This position was affirmed in the case of Bennett Ifediorah & Ors. V. Ben Ume & Ors. (1988) per Nnaemeka-Agu JSC thus: ‘Although this opinion was given in a criminal appeal, it has been followed and applied by the Court of Appeal in many civil appeals against interlocutory decisions. See for an example Akinsola Dawodu & Anor. v. F. O. Olo...
Read more