Akpan IWok Ekanem V. The King (1950)

LawGlobal Hub Judgment Report – West African Court of Appeal

Submission of no case to answer—Where rejected Judge’s findings should be confined to ruling—Undesirable that there should be any observations on the
facts of the case.

Facts

At the close of the Crown case, Counsel for the appellant submitted that there was no case to answer. The trial Judge rejected this submission and, in doing so, stated that the prosecution had established beyond reasonable doubt the guilt of the appellant On appeal the propriety of this statement was considered and Counsel for the appellant argued that the Judge had misdirected himself with regard to the conclusive nature of the evidence of a certain witness.

Held

There was no misdirection. The trial Judge did not support the conviction on the conclusiveness of one witness, but on the evidence as a whole, and the fact that he disbelieved part of the evidence of one witness does not render the whole of that witness’ evidence unacceptable. Where the Judge rejects a submission that there is no case to answer, his observations should be confined to that ruling and there should be no observations on the facts of the case.

Appeal dismissed.