LEGAL PRINCIPLE: EVIDENCE LAW — Traditional History — Pleading Requirements — Necessity of Specific Facts
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
To rely on traditional history, a party must plead the name of the ancestor who founded the land, the names of those after him to whom the land devolved, and the specific acts that constituted the founding. Evidence must be led systematically without gaps or mysterious linkages.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Uwaifo, JSC, in Akanbi v. Salawu & Anor (2003) NLC-1251999(SC) at p. 5; Paras D–E.
"To rely on traditional history, a party must be familiar with the substance of that history, and he must in practical terms do this by pleading the name of the ancestor who founded the land and the names of those after him to whom the land devolved up to the last successor or successors. It is also necessary to plead what the ancestor did specifically to actualize the founding; that is to say, the facts of what he did that constituted the founding. Evidence will have to be led systematically in support of the history without leaving gaps, or creating mysterious or embarrassing linkages which are difficult to explain."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Traditional history requires specific pleading of founder, devolution, and founding acts. Gaps are fatal. The principle applies to land disputes. The court will not fill gaps in the plaintiff’s case. The rule ensures that traditional evidence is credible. The plaintiff must present a complete history. The principle is well-established.