Role Of Judicial Precedent In The Nigerian Legal System As Well As The Hierarchy Of Court -By Aminu Adamu

ABSTRACT

In the course of this paper work, we will be placing more emphasis on judicial precedent and it applications. In the sense that we can consider it applicability in our well framed Nigerian hierarchy of court, right from the apex court, court of appeal, high courts and it equivalent as well as it applicability to our lower courts which are other than court of records.

INTRODUCTION

The doctrine of precedent is essentially a feature of common law system such as England, United states, India and Australia 1. Nigeria being a former colony and protectorate of the United Kingdom, equally inherited the English legal system and it major feature of common law with it huge dependency on judicial precedent 2. Judicial precedent is the principle of law on which a judicial decision is based 3, it do comprise of a “ratio decidendi” reason for the decision and “Obiter dicta/dictum” statement by the way 4. The doctrine has been likened to the killy Loo birds, a rather strange birds which flies forward but looks backward 5. It appears that for an effective operation of doctrine of judicial precedent, the following are necessary:

A settled hierarchy of court

And efficient system of law reporting 6.

Judicial precedent is technical term known as ‘stare decisis’ which is a Latin term means ‘let the decision stands’ 7. Precedent is defined by Black Law Dictionary 8 as a decision that are made on an issue in cases that serve as a point of reference or authority for a judge in deciding same or similar issue in later cases.

Stare decisis is abbreviation of the Latin phrase, ‘stare decisis et non quiet movere’ which means “to abide by a former decision where the same point come up again in litigation”.

In conformity with judicial authority I will borrow the wordings of OPUTA J.S.C in CLEMENT V. IWUANYANWU 9, he stated that ‘precedent is an adjudged case or decision of a higher court considered as furnishing an example or authority for an identical or similar question afterward arising on similar question of law.

Ratio Decidendi stands for reason for the decision or the rule of law proffered by the judge as the basis for his decision.

Ratio decidendi is a Latin for ‘the reason’ or ’the foundation for’ a decision 10. Ratio decidendi in the field of law refers to the moment or principle in a case that ultimately determines its outcome 11.

Obiter dicta/dictum stand for in passing, incidental, cursory 12, remarks not bearing directly upon the question before the court as to affect the determination of the case of action 13.

An Obiter dictum /dictum is what a judge says in his judgement that goes beyond what is necessary to decide the particular case 14.

Precedent can be classified into three (3) basic types of precedent; original, derivative and declaratory.

Original: – this is a type of precedent that establishes a new rule of law and usually occurs in cases of first impression where no existing precedent is to be found 15. A unique case with hardly and past reference material may become a precedent when a judge makes a ruling on it.

Derivative precedent: – in this type of precedent it is merely extension of the frontiers of an existing rule to accommodate similar cases where there is no direct authority on the point under consideration 16. It is a pronouncement that extend the range covers by a previous decision by making amendment.

Declaratory precedent: – it helps to consolidate and strengthen the authority of past decision 17. It states the provision of the law.

We can also further the classification of precedent into binding and persuasive precedent.

Binding precedent are decisions made by superior courts in previous cases that is bound upon lower court to follow. Ratio decidendi are binding part of a precedent.

Persuasive precedent is previous decision of courts that allows a judge whether to follow or set aside in a present case. Obiter dicta is persuasive part of the precedent.

APPLICATION OF PRECEDENT “STARE DECISIS” HIERARCHICAL

On the issue of application of precedent, Nigeria has a well standard hierarchy of courts ranging from the superior courts of record 18 to the inferior courts of record 19, as stipulated by the grand norm of the country 20.

SUPREME COURT

The supreme court replaces then privy council in 1963 as the highest court of the land following Nigerians attainment of republican status in that year 21. The supreme court hears appeal from the court of appeal 22and some other original jurisdiction 23 as conferred to it by the constitution 24. The decision of the supreme court of Nigeria is binding on all other courts to which the common law doctrine of binding precedent applies 25. In the case of DALHATU V. TURAKI 26, the supreme court of Nigerian justices describes the refusal high a court to follow the decision of a supreme court as “an abominable act” which cannot be condoned. Also, the court of appeal and indeed all other lower courts are bound by the decision of the supreme court.

The supreme court is also bound by their decision. However, in WITT AND BUSH LTD V. DALE POWER SYSTEM PLC 27:

“supreme court can only depart from its previous decision based on the grounds of inconsistency with constitution, error in law, or where the decision is reached per incuriam, or where such decision may occasion in injustice or perpetuate injustice in the instant case”.

COURT OF APPEAL

The court of appeal is saddled with responsibility of hearing appeal from the; S.H.C, F.H.C, S.C.A, C.C.A 28and other original jurisdiction 30 as the constitution so provide 29. The court of appeal is bound by the previous decision of the supreme court and also the decision of the court of appeal is bound to all subordinate courts. However, in YOUNG V. BRISTOL 30 case, the court of appeal is bound by its previous decision subject to the following exception:

It was per incuriam

It has to choose between two or more of its own decision and overrule the others

Though not expressly overruled, it is incompatible with a decision of the supreme court

THE FEDERAL AND STATE HIGH COURTS

The federal and state high courts are also bound by the decision of the court of appeal as well as that of the supreme court. It was well seen in the case of DALHATU V. TURAKI 31. The federal and state high courts are bound by their own decision unless it is decided per incuriam, against stream of authorities or in the interest of justice 32. Also in FRA WILLIAMS V. DAILY TIMES LTD 33 it was held that court that carts with coordinate jurisdiction are persuasive in nature.

That is to say all state high courts of different states have persuasive precedent on each other. The decision of state high courts on purely state matters are binding on lower courts within the jurisdiction of that state and persuasive to others 34.

MAGISTRATES AND DISTRICTS COURTS

The above are bound by the decision of the high courts of their respective states and also by the decision of the court of appeal and the supreme court. They are however, not bound by the decision of high courts of other states except were the high court is exercising federal jurisdiction 35.

AREA AND CUSTOMARY COURTS

Some authors are of the opinion that binding precedent applies to those courts which are empowered to administer adjective common law 36, which area and customary courts are not part. However, it is conclusive reiterated that they are so bound and enjoyed to pay attention to the decision coming from the superior courts which binds them so that by so doing they attained substantial justice in their proceedings 37.

FOREIGN COURTS PRECEDENT

English courts decisions are persuasive precedent in Nigerian courts as it can be seen in YAHYA V. STATE 38 Tobi J.S.C is of the opinion

“foreign decision will continue to be useful in the expansion of the frontiers of our jurisprudence but this court cannot invoke such decisions where it thinks they are contrary to the judgement of the court which are correctly decided” 39.

Exception to the doctrine of precedent

Distinguishing: – lower courts can depart from the decision of a superior court if it can clearly show that the issues in previous matter are different from the one at hand, and so it is not applicable.

Conflicting: – lower courts have choice to choose in between two or more conflicting decision of a superior court.

Per incuriam: – literarily means “carelessness” it is where decision is impugned on the ground that it arrived at by the court in ignorance or forgetfulness of authority, statutory or otherwise 40.

Overruled: – overruled decision by statutes or the decision of supreme court.

CONCLUSION

Precedent are always bound upon lower courts even if decided per incuriam, they are only advice to make recommendations on such defective areas. The superior courts also are bind to follow their own decisions as far as it is not overruled by such court by itself. The importance of the operation of precedent in the administration of justice can never be emphasize. Precedent save time, stress, maintain stability, consistency and high degree of certainty, in the practice of the courts. It largely succeeds in keeping justice, fairness, ensuring within reasonable bound, that citizens are treated as equals before the law. However, the rigid adherence by the lower courts lead to injustice and restrict creativity and wisdom of the lower court judges.

PHONE: 07067392775 / 07058707926

EMAIL: aminuadamu2775@gmail.com

LINKEDIN: https://www.linkedin.com/in/aminuadamu-7580b11b4

1 Legal laws “The doctrine of stare decisis” Monday 26th Sep. 2011. https://Legalblogspot.com/2011/09/doctrine-of-stare-decisis.html?

2 Hon. Justice Emmanuel Nnaji “Application of stare decisis and judicial precedent in lower courts in Nigeria” 18th-22nd march, 2019. P.3-4.

3 OBILADE “The Nigerian Legal System” first published 1979 by Sweet Maxwell. Reprinted 1990-2009 Spectrum Books LTD Ibadan. P.111.

4 Ibid.

5 Chief BOLAJI AYIRINDE “Judicial Precedent, Law Reporting and the need for regulation” 14th Nov. 2018. https://www.google.com/search?q=Nigerian+articles+on+stair+decisis&client=ms-opera-mini-android&channel=new

6 Ibid.

7 An Article on “JUDICIAL PRECEDENT IN THE NIGERIAN LEGAL SYSTEM AND A CASE FOR ITS APPLICATION UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW” July, 2010. https://www.ajol.info/index.php/naujilj/article/download/138183/12771

8 LAW DICTINARY 2nd Edition. The Law.com

9 (1993)3 NWLR (pt.107)54

10 Legal Dictionary, April 17, 2019. https://legaldictionary.net/category/philosophy-and-system-of-law/

11 Ibid.

12 AIC LTD V. NNDC (2005)11 NWLR (pt.937)563

13 J.O ASEIN “Introduction to Nigerian Legal System” 2nd Edition 2005 Ababa press Ltd. P.76

14 Hon. J Emmanuel, Op.Cit. p.16

15 J.O ASEIN, Op.Cit. p.77

16 Ibid.

17 Ibid.

18 Section 6(3) & (5) (a-I) of the 1999 constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended 2011).

19 Ibid.

20 Ibid.

21 J.O Asein, Op.Cit. p.80

22 S.233 of the constitution, Op.Cit.

23 Ibid, S.232

24 1999 constitution, Op.Cit.

25 OBILADE, Op.Cit. P.123

26 (2003)15 NWLR (pt.843) 310.

27 (2007)17 NWLR (pt.1062) 1 SC; DAPIANLOG V. DARIYE (2007)8 NWLR (pt.1036) 332 SC.

28 S.240 1999 constitution, Op.Cit. S.C.H, F.H.C, S.C.A, C.C.A I.e. Sate High Courts, Federal High Courts, Sharia Court of Appeal, & Customary Court of Appeal.

29 1999, Op.Cit.

30 [1944] K.B 718.

31 Op.Cit. at.26

32 J.O Asein, Op.Cit.

33 (1990)1 WRN 1 at P.29

34 J.O Asein, Op.Cit. p.90

35 Hon. J Emmanuel, at.2 Op. Cit p.20

36 Ibid, p.21

37 Ibid, p.24

38 (2002)11 WRN 1 SC.

39 J.O Asein, Op.Cit. P.92

40 Ibid, p.93