EVIDENCE LAW — Burden of Proof — Allegation of bias — Previous role as counsel — Requirement to establish identity and connection
Ratio Decidendi
Per Adekeye, JSC [attribution to be confirmed], in Womiloju & Ors v. Anibire & Ors (2010) NLC-123-211-2002(SC) at p. 24, paras. B–C:
"Where an allegation of bias is established by evidence or acknowledgement, it disqualifies a judge from participating in the matter placed before him. An allegation of bias or likelihood of bias against a judge is usually a very serious matter not to be taken with nonchalance. It must be supported by clear, direct, positive, unequivocal and cogent evidence from which real likelihood of bias could be inferred and not mere suspicion."
Explanation / Scope
This principle establishes that an allegation of bias, if established by evidence or acknowledgement, disqualifies a judge from participating in the matter. Such an allegation is serious and must be supported by clear, direct, positive, unequivocal, and cogent evidence from which a real likelihood of bias can be inferred, not mere suspicion. The principle applies where bias is alleged against a judge. It ensures that allegations of bias are properly proved. The principle reflects the seriousness of bias allegations. It prevents disqualification based on mere suspicion. The court must require cogent evidence. The principle provides guidance on proving bias.
Bias allegation requires clear, cogent evidence; mere suspicion insufficient.