“The term leave is defined by the Nigerian Supreme Court in the case of Broad Bank Nigeria Limited VsOlayiwola& Sons Limited (2005) 4M.J.S.C 133 at 143 paragraph E per I. C. Pats-Acholonu, JSC thus:“The term "leave" in judicial context imports the exercise of the court's discretion either positively or negatively as it would be outside the bounds of reason to take for granted that the court would willingly grant an application” - 16 “The Court of Appeal of Nigeria defined leave as spelt out in the case of ASONIBARE v. MAMODU & ANOR (2013) LPELR-22192(CA) (P. 22 paras. DE) Per DANIEL-KALIO, J.C.A. thus:"Leave of Court" according to Black's Law Dictionary, 9th Edition means "Judicial permission to follow a non-routine procedure". According to that dictionary, it is often shortened to "Leave," “The Supreme Court of Nigeria also made it clear the consequences of failure to seek the leave of Court to do an act where leave is required. In the case of EkanemEkpoOtuVs ACB International Bank PLC (2008) 3M.J.S.C. 191 at 206 paragraph G. “Where leave is required either in the Constitution or in the rules of Court and leave is not sought and granted, the Court has no jurisdiction to grant the motion as it is incompetent” “A communal reading of paragraphs 1.0.1 to 1.0.3 above will reveal among other things that a party seeking “leave” of court for a relief has on his own admitted that the relief sought is not expressly granted by court but derivable through the court’s discretion exercised judiciously and judicially.” “It is settled law that there is no dichotomy between error of counsel based on fact and error of counsel based on law in the long settled principle of not visiting the sins/inadvertence of counsel on the litigant. Contrary to the erroneous submission of Counsel for 1st, 2nd, 6th and 7th Counsel, the position of the law is that litigants are masters of facts while counsel is master of the law. It therefore follows that errors/inadvertence of Counsel is more likely to occur in the realm of law and rules and not of facts. The Honorable Court is humbly invited to discountenance the argument of Counsel for 1st, 2nd, 6th and 7th Respondents with regard to Court not visiting the sins of Counsel on the litigants. We are not ashamed to admit our error as Counsel and urge this Honorable Court to incline itself to substantial justice and not visit our errors/inadvertence on the litigants. We pray for striking out of this suit and not dismissal.”