CUSTOMARY LAW — Chieftaincy Disputes — Contradictions in Traditional Evidence — Materiality Requirement
Ratio Decidendi
Per Tobi, JSC, in Salawu & Anor v. Yusuf & Ors (2007) NLC-123-107-2002(SC) at p. 23; Paras B–D:
"In evidence of traditional history, conflicts and contradictions are bound to arise. This is because the parties are grappling with evidence of a long interregnum and history. And history has a way of changing as it passes from one hand to the other. If the changes are not material or substantial, the court will not pay any attention to them. It is only when the changes are material or substantial that the court will not assign probative value to the evidence."
Explanation / Scope
In chieftaincy disputes, contradictions in traditional evidence are expected due to the passage of time. Minor or immaterial contradictions will be disregarded by the court. Only material or substantial contradictions that affect the core of the case will deprive the evidence of probative value.