LEGAL PRINCIPLE: EVIDENCE LAW — Traditional Evidence — Resolution of Conflicting Traditional Histories
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
The court is bound first to decide which of the stories is more plausible or probable by reference to all surrounding facts and circumstances, and if both are equally plausible and probable then by reference to recent acts of ownership as established by evidence.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Musdapher, JSC, in Ogun v. Akinyelu & Ors (2004) NLC-2071999(SC) at p. 17; Paras B–C.
"Thus the court is bound first to decide which of the stories is more plausible or probable by reference to all surrounding facts and the circumstances and if both are equally plausible and probable then by reference to recent acts of ownership as established by evidence."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Courts resolve conflicting traditional histories by first weighing plausibility based on surrounding facts and circumstances. Only when both are equally plausible does the court resort to recent acts of ownership. The principle applies to land and chieftaincy disputes. The rule provides a structured approach to resolving traditional evidence conflicts. Recent acts of ownership are a tie-breaker, not a first resort. The court assesses probability before examining recent possession.
