LEGAL PRINCIPLE: EVIDENCE LAW — Ipse Dixit — Bare Assertion as Evidence
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
A mere ipse dixit (bare assertion resting on the authority of the individual) is admissible evidence, but where further proof is needed, it may not be enough.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Oputa, JSC, in Debs and Anor. v. Cenico (Nig.) Ltd. (1986) 3 NWLR (Pt. 32) 846; (1986) NSCC 837 at p. 843, adopted by Ayoola, JSC, in Egesimba v. Onuzuruike (2002) NLC-1181998(SC) at p. 9; Paras A–E.
"Now ipse dixit literally means he himself said it. It is thus a bare assertion resting on the authority of an individual. There can be no question that 'a mere ipse dixit' is admissible evidence but it is evidence resting on the assertion of the one who made it. Where there is need for further proof a mere ipse dixit may not be enough."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Ipse dixit (bare assertion) is admissible but may be insufficient if corroboration is required. The weight to be attached depends on the circumstances. The court may accept ipse dixit where the witness is credible and the matter is within his knowledge. However, where the fact requires independent proof, a bare assertion may not suffice. The principle applies to oral testimony and affidavits. The court will not rely solely on ipse dixit where there are reasons to doubt. The rule balances admissibility with probative value. The court must evaluate the assertion in context. The principle prevents reliance on unsupported claims where corroboration is necessary.