English Law In Nigeria: A Historical Perspective

The Nigerian legal system is heavily influenced by English law due to the country's colonial history. English laws form a large part of Nigerian laws, and this influence is evident in various aspects of the Nigerian legal framework. The English law in Nigeria comprises rules of common law, doctrines of equity, and statutes of general application. These laws were introduced during the colonial era and continue to have a significant impact on the country's legal landscape even after independence.

The Common Law of England

England's unified judicial system was established after the Norman Conquest in 1066, and the enthronement of William I. Prior to this, different regions of England had different customs, applied by their native courts. After 1066, itinerant justices were sent out by William I to administer the law and, over time, this led to the development of the English common law system.

There were three courts that administered the common law: The King's Bench (or Queen's Bench, depending on the sovereign's gender), the Court of Exchequers, and the Court of Common Pleas. The King's Bench travelled with the sovereign and dealt with criminal matters, the Court of Exchequers handled revenue, and the Court of Common Pleas addressed civil matters.

The English common law, along with the doctrines of equity and statutes of general application, were imported into the Nigerian legal system. They are received into Nigeria by local statutes and form a large part of Nigerian law. This is due to the historical link between the two nations, as well as the fact that Nigerian jurists were trained in the English legal system.

The application of English law in Nigeria is subject to local jurisdiction, circumstances, and necessary verbal alterations. For example, references to the Prime Minister or the Monarch may be modified to refer to the President of Nigeria.

While English law is influential, it is not binding in Nigeria. The Nigerian legal system has the autonomy to develop at its own pace and make modifications as needed to suit the local context.

The Doctrines of Equity

The common law proved to have some drawbacks, one of which was the rigidity of its rules. In some cases, remedies were unavailable in common law, and there were no proper writs for complainants to bring their actions through. This was made worse by the fact that litigants were sometimes unable to enforce the judgments of the common law courts. This led to petitions being written to the crown, which were then considered by the King’s council. Over time, it became customary to channel the petitions through the Chancellor, who established the Court of Chancery to administer the doctrines of equity.

The rules of equity were initially very simple and were applied by the Chancellor based on their own view of justice in each case. However, over time, equity began following the principle of precedents to create certainty.

• Equity acts in personam i.e. the judgement may be enforced against the person wherever he is. (Ayinde v. Abimbola)
• Equity does not suffer a wrong to be without remedy. Ubi jus ibi remedium; where there is a right, there is a remedy. (Martins v. Martins, Alaka v. Alaka)
• Equity follows the law. (Chidiak v. Coker)
• Equity looks to the intent rather than the form. (Balogun v. Balogun)
• Equity looks on that which ought to be done as done. (Savage v. Sarrough)
• Equity imputes intent to fulfill an obligation. (Ojule v. Okoya)
• Equitable remedies are discretionary. (Ibeziako v. Abutu)
• Delay defeats equity. (Craig v. Craig)
• He who comes to equity must come with clean hands. (Brown v. Adebanjo, Taylor v. Williams)
• He who seeks equity must do equity. (Cole v. Folami, Martins v. Molade)
• Where there are equal equities, the law will prevail. (Cave v. Cave)
• Where there are equal equities, the first in time prevails. (John Holt (Nig.) Ltd. v. Holt African Workers Union of Nigeria & Cameroon)
• Equity, like nature, does nothing in vain.
• Equality is equity. (Taiwo v. Lawani)
• Equity does not permit a statute to be a cloak for fraud.

It is worth noting that there have been disagreements between common law and equity, and even a power struggle that often left litigants in the middle. The mutual disaffection resulted in a deep conflict between Lord Ellesmere, then Chancellor, and Sir Edward Coke, Chief justice of the Common Pleas, during the reign of King James I. The King ruled in favour of equity, and the Court of Chancery was later abolished under the Judicature Acts of 1873 and 1875. Since then, both common law and equity have been administered by the same court, with equity prevailing in case of conflict.

Statutes of General Application

The Interpretation Act and the Supreme Court Ordinance of 1914 state that statutes of general application are those that were in force in England on 1 January 1900. However, this definition is not considered adequate, and the courts have elaborated on what Statutes of General Application entail.

In Dede vs African Association Ltd, the court held that although the Supreme Court Ordinance identified Statutes of General Application as being applied in England, it should be taken to mean statutes applicable throughout the United Kingdom, and not just England.

In Attorney General vs John Holt and Co Ltd, Osborne CJ formulated a test to determine whether a statute was of general application. He held that Statutes of General Application are statutes applied by all civil and criminal courts that bind all citizens. He called this a "rough but not infallible test" for the authenticity of a Statute of General Application.

In Lawal vs Younan, the court decided that the Fatal Accident Act of 1846 and the Fatal Accident Act of 1864 are statutes of general application as they concern all citizens.

In Young vs Abina, the West African Court of Appeal declared the Land Transfer Act 1897 a statute of general application. This was because it applied to all persons who died after 1 January 1898 and was in force on 1 January 1900.

It is important to note that since Nigeria gained independence in 1960, the received English law, including Statutes of General Application, is only of persuasive authority. This is because Nigeria is now a sovereign state, and Nigerian law is supreme.

The interpretation Act provides that these foreign laws would only apply in Nigeria to the extent of local jurisdictions and circumstances. For example, in Idehen vs Idehen, the Supreme Court refused to apply the Wills Act of 1837 (a statute of general application) as there was a local law in place—the Wills Law of Western Nigeria.

The Judicial Precedent

The concept of judicial precedent is a key aspect of the English legal system, and it has also been adopted in Nigeria due to the influence of English law in the country's legal system. Judicial precedent refers to the principle that past decisions of higher courts are binding on lower courts and must be followed in similar cases. This means that when a court makes a ruling on a particular legal issue, that decision becomes a precedent for future cases with similar facts.

In Nigeria, the English law, including the principle of judicial precedent, was introduced during the colonial era. Even after independence, English law continues to have a significant influence on the Nigerian legal system. The Supreme Court of Nigeria, established in 1963, is the highest court in the land and plays a crucial role in setting judicial precedents. Lower courts, such as the Court of Appeal, the Federal High Court, and the High Courts of States, follow the precedents set by the Supreme Court.

The application of judicial precedent in Nigeria can be seen in various cases. For instance, in the case of 'Alli v. Okulaja', the Nigerian court refused to follow an English Court of Appeal decision, emphasising that it is only persuasive and not binding. Another example is the case of 'Eliochin v. Mbadiwe', where the Nigerian court departed from the English decision in 'Rookes v. Barnard', demonstrating its independence in interpreting the law.

While judicial precedent provides stability and predictability to the law, it is important to recognise that Nigerian courts are not bound by all English decisions. They may depart from English precedents, especially when local circumstances, cultural values, or subsequent legislation render those precedents inappropriate or outdated. This flexibility allows the Nigerian legal system to adapt to the changing needs and context of the country.

Furthermore, the doctrine of judicial precedent in Nigeria is shaped by the interplay between common law, equity, and statutes. Common law, as a source of judicial precedent, refers to past decisions of judges that establish rules and principles to be followed in similar future cases. Equity, on the other hand, allows for flexibility and exceptions to strict common law rules, ensuring fairness and justice in individual cases. Statutes, being laws enacted by legislative bodies, also play a crucial role in establishing binding precedents that courts must follow.

In conclusion, the judicial precedent in Nigeria is a dynamic and evolving aspect of the country's legal system. While it draws heavily from English law and its principles, Nigerian courts have the autonomy to interpret and apply the law according to the specific needs and circumstances of the country, ensuring a balance between stability and adaptability in the law.

The Influence of Colonial Authorities

The application of English law in Nigeria is a direct result of the country's colonial past. Nigeria was colonised by Britain, and as such, elements of British law have had a significant influence on the Nigerian legal system. This influence is evident in the country's laws, courts, and legal practices.

The first reception of English law in Nigeria was enacted through Ordinance No. 3 of 1863, which stated that:

> All laws and statutes which were enforced within the realm of England on the 1st day of January, 1863, not being inconsistent with any ordinance in force in the Colony, or with any rule made in pursuance of any such Ordinance, should be deemed and taken to be in force in the Colony, and should be applied in the administration of justice, so far as local circumstances would permit.

This ordinance marked the beginning of the introduction of English law into the Nigerian legal system, and it set a precedent for future legislation. The reference date for the application of English law was later shifted to 1st January 1900, and this date has been maintained.

The English law that was received into Nigeria consisted of three main components: the common law of England, the doctrines of equity, and statutes of general application. These laws were introduced through local legislation and formed the basis of the Nigerian legal system.

The common law of England was originally created, developed, and applied by the old common law courts. It was based on the customs of the region and existed largely in an unwritten form. Over time, this common law evolved and was administered by courts such as the King's bench, the Court of Exchequers, and the Court of Common Pleas.

The doctrines of equity were established to address the shortcomings of the common law courts, such as the rigidity of their rules and the lack of available remedies. Petitions were written to the crown, and the Chancellor established the Court of Chancery to administer the doctrines of equity. The rules of equity were initially simple and based on the Chancellor's view of justice, but over time, they began to follow the principle of precedents.

Statutes of general application refer to laws that were in force in England on 1st January 1900 and were applied by all civil and criminal courts, binding all citizens. These statutes were also adopted into Nigerian law and played a significant role in shaping the country's legal landscape.

It is important to note that the reception of English law in Nigeria was not a result of popular support but rather the decisions of colonial authorities charged with making laws for the colony. One of the justifications for this was that the customary law prevalent in Nigeria at the time did not suit the English immigrants and was inadequate for developing business and trade.

In conclusion, the influence of colonial authorities on the application of English law in Nigeria was significant. Through ordinances, legislation, and the establishment of courts, the colonial authorities shaped the Nigerian legal system, and their influence can still be seen today. While Nigeria has since gained independence and sovereignty, the foundations of its legal system remain rooted in English law.

Frequently asked questions