LEGAL PRINCIPLE: LAND LAW – Traditional Evidence – Conflict in Traditional History – How Resolved
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
Where there is a conflict in traditional history, the demeanor of witnesses is of little guide to the truth of the matter as it must be recognized that in the course of transmission from generation to generation of the traditional history mistakes may occur without any dishonest motive whatever. In such a case, the traditional history is to be tested by recent facts established by evidence with a view to determining which of the conflicting version is more probable.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Iguh, JSC, in Alli & Anor v. Alesinloye & Ors (2000) NLC-961994(SC) at p. 13; Paras D–E.
"Where there is a conflict in traditional history, the demeanor of witnesses is of little guide to the truth of the matter as it must be recognized that in the course of transmission from generation to generation of the traditional history mistakes may occur without any dishonest motive whatever. In such a case, the traditional history is to be tested by recent facts established by evidence with a view to determining which of the conflicting version is more probable."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Conflicting traditional histories are resolved not by assessing witness demeanor but by testing versions against recent, established facts. Transmission errors across generations may occur without dishonesty, making credibility judgments unreliable. The court evaluates which tradition is more probable based on contemporary evidence—documents, acts of ownership, possession patterns, and other proven facts. Recent facts serve as objective anchors. This approach recognizes the inherent limitations of oral tradition while enabling rational resolution of historical disputes through corroborative evidence.