LEGAL TERMS AND THEIR MEANINGS

G

Giwa Ihesha

Member
20 COMMON LEGAL TERMS AND THEIR MEANINGS

1. Interim Injunction
A temporary order made by the court to preserve the subject matter of the dispute until a final decision is reached.

2. Mandamus
A court order directing a public officer to perform a duty imposed by law.

3. Interlocutory Injunction
A court order requiring or stopping an action pending the determination of the case.

4. Certiorari
A court order requiring a higher court to review a decision of a lower court or authority.

5. Bail
A temporary release from custody.

6. Plea Bargain
An agreement where an accused person pleads guilty in exchange for a lighter punishment.

7. Allocutus(Plea of mercy)
The chance given to a convicted person to address the court before the sentence. The purpose is to give the convict an opportunity to plead for a lesser punishment.

8. Counterclaim
A claim made by a defendant against the person who sued them.

9. Misnomer
A mistake in the name of a person or thing in a legal document.

10. Order Nisi
A temporary court order that becomes final if no one objects to it.

11. Judicial Review
A court process to check if a decision made by an authority is lawful.

12. Custody
Legal care or control of a person, especially a child.

13. Per Incuriam
A court decision made without considering the relevant law. It is often referred to as a decision made in 'error'.

14. Estate
The property and assets left by a deceased person.

15. Letters of Administration
A document allowing a person to manage the estate of someone who di3d without a valid will.

16. Trust
An arrangement where property is held for the benefit of another person(s).

17. Consent Judgment
A judgment made by a court based on an agreement between the parties.

18. Remand Order
A court order keeping an accused person in custody pending investigation.

19. Damages
Money awarded by the court to compensate someone for harm or loss suffered.

20. Settlement
An agreement reached by parties to resolve a dispute.

©Naomi Umeje, Esq
 
A Subpoena is not a Bench Warrant

Please, stop treating every court document like the police are coming for you. 😂

A subpoena basically says:
“Please come to court and do what the court is asking you to do.”

It may require you to appear as a witness or produce certain documents/evidence.

A bench warrant is a completely different matter.

That is an order issued by a judge for the arrest of a person, commonly because the person failed to appear in court when required or disobeyed a court order.

So:
🥢 Subpoena: “Come to court.”
🥢 Bench Warrant: “Bring this person to court.”

They are not the same thing.

And before you panic because someone sent you a court document, read what the document actually says.

Your neighbour shouting, “They have issued warrant for you!” is not a substitute for reading the document. 😂

Law is not guesswork. Read or consult a lawyer before you panic.

Did you know these two were different?

©️Confidence Aribibia
 
Mention Hearing Adjournment in Court

You enter Court and Hear “Mention.” Then they say “Adjourned.” What exactly is going on?

If you have ever sat inside a courtroom wondering whether the case has started, ended, or nothing happened at all this post is for you.

Three words you must understand before entering a courtroom:

Mention. Hearing. Adjournment.

Let me explain them like we are having a normal conversation.

🥢 Mention

Mention is basically the court saying:
“Okay, what is the situation with this case?” 😂

The court may want to know:
👉 Has the other party been served?
👉 Are the lawyers present?
👉 Have the necessary documents been filed?
👉 Are the parties ready?
👉 What is the next step?

It is generally not the stage where the full trial takes place. Think of mention as a courtroom check-in. The court is checking the status of the case.

🥢 Hearing

Now this one is different. Hearing is where the case gets serious. Depending on the type and stage of the proceedings, the court may hear arguments, witnesses may testify, documents may be tendered, and lawyers may examine or cross-examine witnesses.

This is where the evidence in the case really comes into play.
So if you hear:
“The matter is coming up for hearing.”
It is not the same thing as mention.

🥢 Adjournment

This is the one people hear almost every day. 😂
“Case adjourned to 15th November.”

And somebody immediately says:
“But lawyer, what did you people do today?” 😂

Adjournment simply means the matter has been moved to another date.

It does NOT automatically mean you lost the case.
It does NOT mean the case has ended.

It simply means:
“We will continue this matter on another date.”

A matter may be adjourned for several reasons perhaps a witness is unavailable, a party needs to take a necessary step, documents need attention, the court's time has run out, or the matter is not ready to proceed.

And yes, a case can be adjourned during a mention or during a hearing.

So remember it like this:

🥢 Mention = “What is the situation with this case?”
🥢 Hearing = “Let us proceed with the case.”
🥢 Adjournment = “We will continue another day.”

The next time you sit in court and hear:

“Mention.”
“Hearing.”
“Adjourned.”

Don't look at your lawyer like:
“Counsel, are we winning or losing?” 😂😂

Now you understand what those words mean.

Court is not magic. Once you understand the language, you understand the process better.

Save this post. You may need it before your next court attendance.

Which courtroom word should I explain next?

©️Confidence Aribibia
I remain your favorite Lawyer💕
 
A COURT MAY HAVE THE POWER TO HEAR YOUR CASE, BUT DOES IT HAVE THE POWER TO HEAR THAT KIND OF CASE?

In simple terms, subject-matter jurisdiction refers to the legal authority of a court to adjudicate a particular type or category of dispute. It answers a fundamental question:

“Does this court have the legal power to hear this kind of case?”

For example, a court established to determine matters relating to a particular subject cannot automatically assume jurisdiction over every dispute merely because the parties are before it.

WHY DOES IT MATTER?

Subject-matter jurisdiction is not a mere procedural technicality. It goes to the competence and legitimacy of the judicial process.

Where a court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction, its proceedings may be rendered null and void, depending on the applicable legal framework. Importantly, parties generally cannot confer jurisdiction on a court simply by consent, waiver, or agreement where the law has not vested that jurisdiction in the court.

NOTE:

Subject-matter jurisdiction asks:

“Does this court have authority to determine this type of dispute?”

Personal jurisdiction asks:

“Does this court have authority over the particular person or entity before it?”

They address different dimensions of judicial authority.

BOTTOM LINE:

Before a court considers the merits of a dispute, there is often a more fundamental question:

“Do I have jurisdiction to hear this matter at all?”

That question can determine whether an entire proceeding can validly continue.

In law, jurisdiction is foundational. Without the requisite jurisdiction, even an otherwise compelling case may encounter a formidable procedural barrier.

Stay legally informed!

Happiness Oluoma Oguaghamba

#Law #LegalEducation #SubjectMatterJurisdiction #Jurisdiction #LawStudents #LegalKnowledge #Court #Litigation #LegalPractice
 
You say Power. We Lawyers call it Jurisdiction

You say:
“Who gave this person the power to handle this matter?”

Lawyers say:
“Does the court have Jurisdiction?” 😂

Jurisdiction simply means the legal power or authority of a court to hear and decide a particular case.

Think of it this way

You cannot just walk into any court and say:
“Your Honour, I have a case. Please judge it.” 😂

The court must first have the legal authority to hear that particular matter.

For example, a court may have power over certain types of cases but not others and this is why lawyers sometimes raise the issue of jurisdiction before the court even gets into the main case.

Because if a court does not have jurisdiction, the problem is not whether you have a strong case.

The problem is:
“This court may not have the power to hear this case in the first place.”

So the next time you hear a lawyer say:
“The Honourable Court lacks jurisdiction…”
Don't be confused.

The lawyer is basically saying:

“My Lord, with all due respect, this court may not have the legal power to deal with this matter.” 😂

Lawyers have a big word for what laymen simply call Power or Authority.

JURISDICTION.

Now you know. 😂

©️Confidence Aribibia
I remain your favorite Lawyer💕
 
YOU’VE BEEN FOUND GUILTY, BUT THE COURT IS NOT DONE HEARING FROM YOU.

Have you ever wondered what happens after a person is convicted but before the court pronounces sentence? This is where allocutus becomes significant.

WHAT IS ALLOCUTUS?

Allocutus is the opportunity given to a convicted person, or their counsel, to address the court before sentence is imposed. It is essentially a plea in mitigation, where the defence presents circumstances that may persuade the court to exercise leniency within the bounds of the law.

At this stage, counsel may draw the court’s attention to relevant mitigating factors, such as:

• The accused’s age and personal circumstances
• Whether the person is a first-time offender
• Remorse or genuine contrition
• The possibility of rehabilitation
• The accused’s health or family circumstances, where legally relevant
• The nature and circumstances of the offence
• Cooperation with the authorities, where applicable
• Any other circumstance recognised by law as capable of mitigating punishment

Why is allocutus important?

A conviction establishes criminal liability, but sentencing is a distinct judicial exercise. The court must consider the circumstances surrounding the offender and the offence before determining the appropriate sentence, subject to the applicable law and sentencing principles.

Allocutus therefore gives the defence an opportunity to place relevant mitigating circumstances before the court rather than allowing sentence to be determined without hearing from the convicted person.

NOTE: Allocutus does not mean that a convicted person is asking the court to overturn the conviction. The question at this stage is generally what sentence should be imposed, not whether the person is guilty.

In simple terms:

Conviction answers: “Is the person guilty?”
Allocutus addresses: “What should the court consider before imposing sentence?”
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top