Stare Decisis and Legal certainty in Nigerian Jurisprudence: Lessons from Abdullahi v Adetutu and Benjamin v kalio
Faculty
Department
Year of Publication
Keyword
upload
Publication Type
Abstract
This project examines the potency of the doctrine of stare decisis and the binding force of precedent in Nigeria’s legal system. It uses the twin Supreme Court decisions in Benjamin v
Kalio and Abdullahi v Adetutu as focal case studies. The doctrine of stare decisis mandates that lower courts follow decisions of superior courts, and that courts generally adhere to their own past rulings, fostering consistency, predictability, and fairness in adjudication. Nigeria has a very complex legal system and slow litigation process which is mixed up with the issue of judicial interpretation of statutes. It has become very important for our laws to be certain and also for
uniformity in interpretation of statutes to avoid miscarriage of justice. Having a complex legal system also requires well mapped out rules and principles mostly in areas involving land and conveyance which must be strictly adhered to when similar situations occur in order to ensure certainty. There is need to fill up the gap created by Land Use Act and the various Land
Instrument Registration Law of various states. The LIRL of various States have been subject to numerous interpretations in a plethora of cases involving land dispute and ownership of land. We need to dive into the mischief rule to fully understand the purpose of the statute. The main objective of this study is to dive into the substantive aspect of the law, the judicial interpretation of the statutes and the need for similar cases to follow similar rulings except they are explicitly distinguished from each other. Data will be generated from law reports and similar cases and will be subjected to rigorous analysis to fully get the true objective and purpose of the law as regards to ownership of land and conveyance to instill uniformity in interpretation. The analysis will reveal the gap in the law as regards judicial interpretation in land disputes and also proffer solutions and remedies to salvage the never ending saga involving land disputes. This study will bring to light abnormalities in judicial interpretation of similar statutes and break down the importance of distinguishing or pronouncing that a previous decision was reached per incurian before laying down a new principle.
Kalio and Abdullahi v Adetutu as focal case studies. The doctrine of stare decisis mandates that lower courts follow decisions of superior courts, and that courts generally adhere to their own past rulings, fostering consistency, predictability, and fairness in adjudication. Nigeria has a very complex legal system and slow litigation process which is mixed up with the issue of judicial interpretation of statutes. It has become very important for our laws to be certain and also for
uniformity in interpretation of statutes to avoid miscarriage of justice. Having a complex legal system also requires well mapped out rules and principles mostly in areas involving land and conveyance which must be strictly adhered to when similar situations occur in order to ensure certainty. There is need to fill up the gap created by Land Use Act and the various Land
Instrument Registration Law of various states. The LIRL of various States have been subject to numerous interpretations in a plethora of cases involving land dispute and ownership of land. We need to dive into the mischief rule to fully understand the purpose of the statute. The main objective of this study is to dive into the substantive aspect of the law, the judicial interpretation of the statutes and the need for similar cases to follow similar rulings except they are explicitly distinguished from each other. Data will be generated from law reports and similar cases and will be subjected to rigorous analysis to fully get the true objective and purpose of the law as regards to ownership of land and conveyance to instill uniformity in interpretation. The analysis will reveal the gap in the law as regards judicial interpretation in land disputes and also proffer solutions and remedies to salvage the never ending saga involving land disputes. This study will bring to light abnormalities in judicial interpretation of similar statutes and break down the importance of distinguishing or pronouncing that a previous decision was reached per incurian before laying down a new principle.
Supervisor(s)
co-supervisor