LEGAL PRINCIPLE: EVIDENCE LAW — Weight of Evidence — Native Courts — Proceedings in Native Courts — Approach to Determining Issues
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
In dealing with proceedings from native courts, appellate courts must not be unduly strict with matters of procedure. It is the substance of the claim that is the determinant factor. It is permissible to look at the claim, findings, and evidence to ascertain the real issues.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Iguh, JSC, in Ezeanya v. Okeke (1995) NLC-2651988(SC) at p. 14; Paras. A–E.
"It is a matter of common knowledge that pleadings were not filed in the native courts and consequently the appellate courts have consistently held: (i) That it is not the form of an action in a native tribunal that must be stressed where the issue involved is otherwise clear. It is the substance of such a claim that is the determinant factor. (ii) Proceedings in a native court have to be carefully scrutinised to ascertain the subject matter of the case and the issues raised therein. (iii) It is permissible to look at the claim, findings and even the evidence given in a native tribunal to find out what the real issues were. (iv) In dealing with proceedings from native courts, appellate courts must not be unduly too strict with regard to matters of procedure as the whole object of such trials is that the real dispute between the parties should be adjudicated upon."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Appellate courts reviewing native court proceedings adopt a liberal approach. Substance, not form, is key. The court may examine the entire record to identify real issues. Technical procedural irregularities are not fatal. The principle applies to Area Courts and Customary Courts. The court will not impose strict common law standards. The rule promotes access to justice. The appellate court will focus on whether substantial justice was done. The principle recognises the informal nature of native courts.