LEGAL PRINCIPLE: EVIDENCE LAW — Traditional History — Application of the Rule in Kojo v. Bonsie
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
The rule in Kojo v. Bonsie is that where parties rely on traditional history in proof of their title and the evidence of traditional history is conflicting or inconclusive, the rule is to be applied by making reference to facts in recent history to resolve the issue. This rule is usually applied in land cases where acts of ownership exercised within living memory are used to verify evidence of tradition and history.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Onu, JSC, in Iheanacho & Ors v. Chigere & Ors (2004) NLC-1512000(SC) at p. 8; Paras B–D.
"The rule in Kojo v. Bonsie (1957) 1 WLR 122 at 126 is that: 'Where parties rely on traditional history in proof of their title and the evidence of traditional history is conflicting or is inconclusive, the rule is to be applied to the case by making reference to facts in recent history to resolve the issue.' This rule is usually applied in land cases where acts of ownership exercised within living memory is used as litmus test in verification of evidence of tradition and history."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
When traditional history evidence is conflicting or inconclusive, the court applies the Kojo v. Bonsie rule. The court makes reference to facts in recent history to resolve the issue. The principle applies to land and chieftaincy cases. Recent acts of ownership within living memory verify traditional history. The rule provides a method for choosing between competing traditional histories. The court tests traditional accounts against established facts.