NWLRNigeria Weekly Law Report (Yusuf Ali & Co.)
NWLRNormalized Water Leaving Radiance
NWLRNational Weight Loss Registry (database)
Copyright 1988-2018 AcronymFinder.com, All rights reserved.
References in periodicals archive ?
(42.) Fawehinmi v Abacha (2000) 6 NWLR (Part 660) 228.
For an online review of the judgment, see Adewale Donald Ologbon, "The Supreme Court Judgment," http://www.nigerianmuse.com/20090107090134zg/articles/ the-supreme-courtjudgment.See also the case Buhari v Obasanjo (2005) 13 Nigeria Weekly Law Reports (NWLR) Pt 941 page 1
See OKONTA VS PHILIPS (2010) 18 NWLR ( Pt 1225) 320 SC.
Adesanya and another (1989) 3 NWLR (part 109) pg 250 @ 274 wherein it said: 'We are final not because we are infallible; rather we are infallible because we are final.'
Ondo State House of Assembly, (2015) 8 NWLR. Part 1461 Page 314, Stella who defected to the APGA from the PDP (on which platform she was elected a Senator and where there was no faction as at time of her defection) ought to have her seat in the Senate declared vacant by the court.
The principle is, therefore, that where there are provisions in a special Act and in a general Act on the same subject which are inconsistent, if the special Act gives a complete rule on the subject, the expression of the rule acts as an exception to the subject-matter of the rule from the general Act.' Back here in Nigeria, the maxim has been applied in several cases, including the case of Ibori V Ogboru (2004) 15, NWLR (PT 895) 154, where the Court declared as follows: 'There is a canon of construction of statutes known as 'generalis specialibus non derogant'.
See also the case of held in Ojukwu V Obasanjo (2004) 12 NWLR (PT 886) 169.
MULAN maintains that the position of the law remains as decided by the Court of Appeal in its judgement in the Provost, Kwara State College of Education, Ilorin and two others versus Bashirat Saliu and two others (CA/IL/49/2006); and Asiyah and others versus Lagos State government and others (2016) 15 NWLR (Pt 1535) 117, where the court declared that the 'the use of hijab by female Muslim students constitutes an act of worship, hence the refusal to allow the appellants wear it on their uniform is a clear infraction of their right'.