Baker, Ag. C.J. This is a Case Stated by the learned Judge of the Supreme Court sitting at Ibadan for the opinion of the West African Court of Appeal under the provisions of section 7 of the West African Court of Appeal Ordinance. The relevant facts are as follows;-
“Plaintiff instituted an action claiming damages done to his motor-car by the reckless driving of defendant's lorry by defendant’s driver. Upon the .action coming on for hearing Counsel for plaintiff sought to put in evidence the proceedings in a criminal action against defendant’s driver heard in the Magistrate’s Court and in which defendant was convicted in respect of the said collision between plaintiff’s car and defendant’s lorry, to which Counsel for the defendant objected.
“Plaintiff's Counsel referred to the case of Peter O. Ezeani and 16 Others v. Eneli Ezene and 30 Others (1) as authority for the admissibility of the proceedings. The learned Judge, however, upheld the objection on the authority of Holington v. F. Hewthorn and Co. Ltd. (2) and now asks the Court if his ruling was correct in Law.”
In the before-mentioned case of Ezeani and - Others v. Ezene and - Others (1) the trial Judge refused to receive in evidence the certified copy of criminal proceedings in which the defendants were convicted in respect of the same acts upon which the then proceedings were grounded. Upon the case coming to appeal this Co11rt (differently constituted) in the year 1935 following the decision in re Crippen 1911 Probate, page 108, and Nash v. Darley (1914), 1 K.B. decided that the certified copy of the criminal proceedings should have been admitted and sent the case back for retrial.
Since this decision the law has undergone modification and changes and in the judgment in the before-mentioned case of Holington v. F. Hewthorn and - Co. (2) the following words occur;-
The Court of Appeal are clear that the civil Court must base its findings on. the facts placed before it without any regard to the proceedings before another tribunal. Upon this point the Court of Appeal has critically examined three cases, i.e. in the Estate of Crippen 1911, page 108, Partington v. Parlington and Atkinson, 132 L.T. 495 and O'Toole v. O'Toole, 132 L.T. 495 and hold that these cases go beyond and are contrary to the authorities and ought not to be followed in future.”
In view of this decision (with which we agree) we are satisfied that the learned Judge was correct when he refused to admit the before-mentioned evidence.
Appeal dismissed