LEGAL PRINCIPLE: CUSTOMARY LAW – Customary Court Proceedings – Substance Over Form Where Fair Hearing Is Observed
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
Where a customary court acts in good faith, listens fairly to both sides, and gives fair opportunity to present their case, it cannot be accused of offending natural justice, even if its procedure is informal. The substance of the claim, not the form, is determinative.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Mohammed, JSC, in Haladu Dadi v. Idi Garba (1995) NLC-151989(SC) at pp. 4–5; Paras A–C.
"Except in such customary courts with laid down and written procedure, for example, Islamic law in Area Courts, there are no rules governing proceedings before customary courts. So long as those courts act in good faith, listen fairly to both sides and give fair opportunity to the parties adequately to present their case and to correct or contradict any relevant statement prejudicial to their view, they cannot be accused of offending against the rules of natural justice… What is essential in examining the trials in a customary court is to look into the entire evidence in the proceedings in order to discover the precise nature and subject matter in controversy between the parties. The form of wording of the claim and the parties’ capacity should not be a germane issue for the impeachment of a customary court’s judgment."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Customary courts are not bound by strict rules of procedure. As long as fair hearing is observed, technical defects in form do not invalidate proceedings. The appellate court focuses on the substance of the dispute. The principle recognises the informal nature of customary courts. The parties are entitled to a fair opportunity to present their cases. The court will not reverse for technicalities. The rule applies to all customary courts. The appellate court must examine the entire record. The principle promotes access to justice in customary courts.