LEGAL PRINCIPLE: CIVIL PROCEDURE — Customary Courts — Appellate Review of Customary Court Proceedings
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
In reviewing Customary Court proceedings, appellate courts must consider the substance liberally, reading the record to understand what the proceedings were about, and determine whether substantial justice has been done within the procedure permitted by such courts.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Uwaifo, JSC, in Onwuama v. Ezeokoli (2002) NLC-1721996(SC) at p. 6; Paras B–C.
"It must be remembered that this case was tried in a Customary Court where pleadings are unknown. The proceedings in such court are to be considered upon a broad view as to whether they were conducted in pursuit of the justice of the case presented by both parties. In other words, appellate courts are to consider the substance of the proceedings of Native, Customary or Area Courts liberally and this is done by reading the record to understand what the proceedings were all about so as to determine whether substantial justice has been done to the parties within the procedure permitted by such courts."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Customary Courts operate without formal pleadings. Appellate courts must adopt a liberal approach, focusing on substance rather than form. The court reads the record to understand the real dispute and whether substantial justice was done. Technical procedural irregularities are not fatal unless they cause a miscarriage of justice. The principle recognises the informal nature of customary courts. The appellate court will not impose strict common law procedural standards. The rule applies to all appeals from Customary, Area, and Native Courts. The court will examine whether the parties had a fair opportunity to present their cases. The principle promotes access to justice and respect for customary adjudication.
