LAND LAW — Proof of Title — Trial Court’s Duty to Determine Preferred Version of Traditional History
Ratio Decidendi
Per Onnoghen, JSC, in Onwubuariri & Ors v. Igboasoyi & Ors (2011) NLC-123-212-2003(SC) at p. 14; Paras A—C:
"It should be noted that evaluation of evidence and ascription of probative value or weight to be attached thereto remains the primary duty of the trial judge who heard the witnesses testified and saw them in action so as to be better placed in accessing their credibility. As stated earlier both parties relied on traditional history which in effect pitches the version of traditional history presented by the plaintiffs against that by the respondents. The duty of the trial court in the circumstance is to determine the preferred version having regards to the evidence presented in proof of same, the court being faced with the oath of the parties against each other."
Explanation / Scope
This principle establishes that where parties rely on competing traditional histories, the trial court, having heard and seen the witnesses, must evaluate the evidence and determine the preferred version based on credibility and the evidence presented. The principle applies in land disputes involving conflicting traditional histories. It ensures that the credible version prevails. The principle reflects the trial court’s duty to resolve conflicts. It requires the court to assess the oath of the parties. The court must determine the preferred version. The principle provides guidance on traditional history.