Nigeria: Passıng The Burden Of Legal Fees To The Other Sıde - A Recoverable Cost?

Last Updated: 8 August 2016
Article by Folabi Kuti

It is often the practice to make out the statement (or, particulars) of claim in civil suits with a head of claim seeking to recover, in addition to other heads of claim, a claim for solicitor's fees; often couched as 'legal fees' or 'costs for instituting and maintaining the action'. It appears fairly straightforward: the claimant is seeking, in addition to the reliefs for which he has brought an action, to be 'made whole' for engaging the services of a lawyer, and for incurring ancillary expenses for instituting or filing a court action. 

The English rule, which instructively goes through constant reforms, generally provides that the party who loses in court pays the other party's attorney's fees, and the jurisprudential basis is not too farfetched. In apportioning costs associated with a particular decision to the loser, it indemnifies the successful party for the costs he has undertaken in prosecuting/defending the action, whilst also discouraging frivolous or questionable litigation. Amazingly, the strand of the decisions around here, seems not to have been made in a consistent manner as to necessarily suggest that same is or is not a recoverable cost.

It appears to have started from the decision of the Court of Appeal in Ihekwoaba v A.C.B Ltd. [1998] 10 NWLR [Pt. 571] 590 at 610-611 when the Court refused a claim for solicitor's fees on the understandably plausible ground (disclosed by the peculiar fact-circumstance of that decision) that 'there is no system of costs taxation to get a realistic figure'. Costs assessed for legal fees are, by the provisions of the rules of court, subject to tax, and the refusal of the claim here was hinged on a deficient or near-absent costs taxing system.

Shortly thereafter, one of the issues that came up for consideration in Guinness Nig. Plc. v. Emmanuel Nwoke [2000] 15 NWLR [Pt. 689] 135 (yet another decision of the Court of Appeal) was whether the respondent can validly claim his solicitor's fee from the appellant. The Court of Appeal upheld the trial court's dismissal of the claim for solicitor's fee, noting, in addition to the main reason for refusing same, that it is "unethical and an affront to public policy to pass on the burden of solicitor's fee to the other party". Curiously, even in the light of the novelty of such a proposition, the Court did not as much as offer an explanation as to how a claim for Solicitor's fee smacks of an immoral request and/or runs contrary to public policy considerations. 

Each case must however turn on its own set of facts to rationalise the reason for the decision reached, and thus the Court of Appeal tried to explain, albeit without much success, in SPDC v Okonedo [2008] 9 NWLR [Pt. 1091] p. 85 the distinguishing reason for holding the hirer of legal services to the expense of his 'bargain' in Guinness' case. The Court of Appeal offered that the claim for solicitor's fee was not allowed because the respondent claimed (and indeed, 'proved') as 'special damages' his solicitor's fee which stood at 'a staggering sum of N 500,000.00 and which arose after the cause of action had arisen.' With respect to the Court, it is not out of the ordinary to have a litigant, in the normal chain of events, engage a lawyer after the set of facts donating a right to bring an action has arisen. And, again with respect, it beats the imagination how this could make for disallowing an attendant solicitor's fee incurred thereon.

Roundabout the time of this decision, the Supreme Court had an opportunity to consider a similar request in Christopher Nwanji v. Coastal Services (Nig.) Ltd. [2004] 11 NWLR [Pt. 885] 552 at 569, C-D. The Respondent in Nwanji's case had asked the apex Court to discountenance the position in Ihekwoaba's on the ground that the Court's pronouncement there was made in passing. Uwaifo JSC, who, earlier as Justice of the Court of Appeal, was incidentally in the lead in Ihekwoaba's, reiterated that the observation as to the difficulty in getting a realistic figure as damages attendant upon a properly assessed solicitor's fees was a major part of the decision and remains a valid position. From this writer's limited research, the apex Court has since not pronounced otherwise – even as there was an earlier decision in the 1960s when indeed the self-same apex Court, per Ademola CJF, hinted at costs being recoverable for engaging a Queen's Counsel where there is no local expertise available in that specialised area of law (Rewane v Okotie-Eboh [1960] 1 NSCC 135).  But that, for the moment, appears a digression.

All considered, the question whether a claim for solicitor's fee is recoverable still does not lend itself to an easy answer. The law as it has been interpreted till date, reveals two sets of positions on the point. On both strands, a claim for solicitor's fee from the unsuccessful party is contextually put as an 'unusual claim...difficult to accept in this country', Ihekwoba  v ACB , followed by the apex court's decision in 2003 (and which decision in Nwanji's has not been overruled or set aside by the self-same Supreme Court) appears to suggest that where such assessed costs are properly taxed, pleaded and proved as special damages, same will be allowed. The Supreme Court being at the pinnacle of judicial decisions, it is safe to simply conclude here that those are the criteria that must be crossed to avail such a claim; unless the apex Court pronounces otherwise at another opportune time. But that is not all on the subject.

The moral fibre?

The claim for solicitor's fee was refused in Guinness on twin-grounds of the claim not arising from the transaction between the parties, and that same was unethical and an affront to public policy. For some reason, how such a claim runs against ethics and public policy considerations was not expatiated upon. This appears a major pitfall in the case which, by the hallowed principle of stare decisis, many a decision from the High Court still had to follow devotedly, in dismissing a claim for solicitor's fee.

In SPDC v Okonedo (supra) an award of special damages for solicitor's fee was allowed, with respect, on the slightly blurred line that what was claimed was for specific expense incurred in engaging a solicitor to have a brewing dispute otherwise settled out of court and such same will not constitute an immoral claim.  In International Offshore Construction Ltd & 3 Ors. v Shoreline Liftboats Nig. Ltd [2003] 16 NWLR [Pt. 845] p. 157 the award made as damages for engaging solicitor's services was affirmed by the Court of Appeal on the ground that unchallenged evidence was led in its proof. Guinness was not considered, so understandably the moral question was kept for another time. In Lonestar Drilling Nig. Ltd v. New Genesis Executive Security Ltd [2011] LPELR – 4437 CA there was a claim for costs incurred in engaging a solicitor to prosecute a substantive claim initiated under the Undefended List procedure. The Court of Appeal, in affirming the lower Court's position that the claimant did not prove the claim as necessary expenses, accepted nonetheless that costs, pleaded and proved as special damages, may be awarded for securing legal representation, and, for the litigant's "time and effort in coming to court."

The cost-shifting principle also fell for animated discussion in the Court of Appeal decision in Naude v Simon [2014] ALL FWLR [Pt. 753] CA 1878. The Court, per Akomolafe- Wilson JCA reviewed the earlier decisions of the court on the same, inevitably drawing a close thus:

"Having regard to the above recent cases, it is no more in doubt that damages for cost, which includes solicitor's fees and out of pocket expenses, if reasonably incurred are usually paid by courts if properly pleaded and proved. In short, the decision of this honourable court in the cited cases Ihekwoaba v. A.C.B. Ltd and Guinness (Nig.) Plc v. Nwoke where this court held that the payment of solicitor's fees as damages is not supported in this country does not represent the present state of the mind of the courts in this country.  In more recent times, it is common for solicitors to include their fees for prosecution of cases and pass same to the other party as part of claims for damages, which have been awarded by the courts once the claims are proved."

Commendably enough, the position in these later decisions of the Court of Appeal appear to make passage for recovery of solicitor's fee. However, it is pertinent to mention that the quoted portion of His Lordship's erudition on the point, appears to suggest that the position of the Court taken in Ihekwoaba v. A.C.B. Ltd, as endorsed by the apex Court in Nwanji, and which has not been upturned by the apex court is no longer the law. As emphasized above, there are prescriptions in Nwanji's which, unless upturned by the apex Court, remains the law to make for a successful outcome on a claim for recovery of professional fees. The real issue, in view of the peculiarity of 'pleading and proving costs' to make for a successful claim on same is to develop our costs taxation systems/process. 

Guinness', happily, it can be safely argued, does not represent the position of the law anymore, if it ever was. Except passing the burden of solicitor's fee to the other side is, with respect, being mistaken for the public policy prohibition against 'maintenance' which Lord Loughborough explained in the English case of Wallis v Duke of Portland 3 Ves. Jun. 494 at 502 in these terms: 'parties shall not by their countenance aid the prosecution of suits of any kind; [because] every person must bring [his action or suit] upon his own bottom, and at his own expense.', making an unsuccessful party pay the litigation costs of the successful party will not run against the thread of ethical concerns. It may be argued that it will discourage actions, but the wicket in response is that award of costs is not offered at the mere asking but as 'regulated' within the discretion of the court, subject to its being pleaded as special damages and proven.

Commendably enough, the High Court Rules of Lagos State (2012) has made a pioneering move in providing beyond a bareknuckle statement that costs follow events.  It specifies expressly in Order 49 1(1) (a) that such costs shall include 'legal representation'. That puts it beyond cavil, and the other rules of court may want to consider adopting such express provision. Costs should follow events, in every sense of that aphorism.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Related Topics
Related Articles
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions