facts which the plaintiff needed to support his claim occurred that year. The decision would have been different had the defendant proved that he was in adverse possession of the property, something he could not do when he occupied the property under the claim that he was the true owner while the will was in dispute between 1974 and 1995. The fact that a plaintiff removes himself out of jurisdiction before or after the cause of action accrues is no ground for suspending the operation of the statute of limitation. In other words, that a party is abroad all the while the squatter was in possession is no defence against the plea of the limitation statute. Thus, in Lagos University Teaching Hospital v. Adewole [1998] 5 NWLR (Pt. 550) 406 CA, the plaintiff‟s contract of employment was terminated while he was away on study leave in the United Kingdom. His action for wrongful termination some eight years later was declared two years late and statute barred. The fact that he was abroad for most part of the eight years made no difference to the court. Disability The Limitation Law contains an exception for persons under disability and the only disability recognized under section 2 of the statute is in regard to infants and persons of unsound mind (lunatic). They have six years after the cessation of their disability to commence and action to redress any wrong against them during their disability. For example, an infant has six years after attaining a majority to redress any wrong done to him as a minor, thereafter, the matter become statute barred, i.e. the Limitation Law will become applicable. Where the action is based on the fraud or mistake of the defendant, the period of limitation does not begin to run until the plaintiff discovers the fraud or mistake.