Facts:

The Applicant, who was the first Respondent in the substantive Appeal, prayed the Court for leave to adduce additional evidence on appeal. The Appellant/Respondent (hereafter referred to as the Respondent), was the Plaintiff at the Federal High Court (trial Court) wherein it claimed:

A Declaration that by virtue of a Certificate of Trademark Registration issued to the Plaintiff in Class 9 – and in Class 11 – respectively and particularly the registration since 1996, the Plaintiff is entitled to the exclusive use of the Trademark “LEXUS” in Classes 9 and 11.

The Applicant, as the first Defendant at the trial Court, denied the allegations and also claimed that it is the registered proprietor and owner of the Trademark LEXUS in Nigeria with respect to vehicles and spare parts in Class 12 of the Fourth Schedule of the Trademarks Act, but failed to tender any proof of registration of its LEXUS trademark registration in the said Class 12. The trial Court found in favour of the Respondent, and the Applicant appealed to the Court of Appeal, wherein its appeal was successful.

The Respondent being aggrieved by the decision of the Court of Appeal appealed to the Supreme Court. The Applicant, by an application, however, is praying the appellate Court for leave to adduce additional evidence on appeal by tendering certain documents which it was unable to do at the trial Court and the Respondent by its counter affidavit is praying the Court to dismiss the application.