LEGAL PRINCIPLE: LAND LAW – Declaration of Title – Traditional Evidence May Ground Title Where More Cogent and Credible
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
Traditional evidence may ground a declaration of title where it is more cogent and credible than that of the opposing party, especially where the opposing party's evidence contains glaring contradictions and obvious untruth.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Iguh, JSC (adopting the trial court’s findings), in Agbaka v. Amadi (1998) NLC-561994(SC) at pp. 21–22; Paras D–A.
"Both parties pleaded and relied heavily on traditional evidence in proof of their title to the land in dispute… The totality of the plaintiffs' evidence of a grant satisfies me as being more cogent and credit worthy than that of the defendants which carries glaring contradiction and obvious untruth."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Traditional evidence can establish title if cogent and credible. The court must evaluate the evidence. Contradictions in the opposing party’s case strengthen the other party’s case. The principle applies to land disputes. The court may prefer one party’s tradition over the other’s. The rule is based on the Kojo v. Bonsie principle. The court will test tradition by recent acts of possession. The party with more credible tradition may succeed. The principle promotes the use of traditional evidence in land cases.