authorities of National Courts support application of Article 38(1) of the Statute Justice which is applicable pursuant amended are apt. This authority this stand point and by the of International Court of to Article 19 (1) of our Protocol as is Esonwune Nwadike and another versus Martin Nwadike and 5 ors 1987 4 NWLR (Pj\RT 65) 394, where documents annexed to affidavit evidence were deemed admitted virtue of section 76 of the Evidence Act. We think the observations therein are relevant and are the same with the observation by made of this Court in this instance. 47. In the case mentioned above, the documents which were photocopies of secondary evidence within the meaning of section 94(a) of the evidence Act were relied upon and the defendants did not dispute the existence or their authenticity as exhibited by the plaintiff and the defendant referred to them and quoted and used extracts from them in their counter affidavits. That COUlt opined that that being so, the exhibits are deemed to have been admitted by the defendants under section 74 of the Evidence Act. In the present situation herein, the documents annexed to the motion are not only material but relevant to the fact as to whether the applicant was remanded in prison custody or not and whether he is still in detention adopts is that right now. The obvious position these documents are relevant the Court hereby and material for examination. ONUS OF PROOF and the reply of defendants in material particular describe whether the parties have made out their claim or defence as the case may be. The plaintiff has a duty to place all material facts to establish the reliefs he seeks for in the present case with credibility which would convince the 17