Nigeria: Court Procedure

International arbitration is often chosen because it offers parties a final and enforceable decision.[1] In most cases, that finality is one of its greatest advantages.

Commercial dispute resolution in Nigeria is being reshaped by third-party funding and asset tracing mechanisms. While the Arbitration and Mediation Act 2023 has abolished champerty doctrines in arbitration contexts, traditional common law restrictions persist in court litigation, creating a complex legal landscape where funding viability increasingly depends on enforceable asset identification and preservation strategies.

SPDC had lawfully terminated a contract with a contractor who had significantly misrepresented their technical expertise and capability to fulfill the agreement.

For international companies considering Nigeria, courtroom delays are costly: commercial cases can take five years or more, and litigation may consume up to 15% of the disputed sum.

A fuel supplier failed to deliver 2 million litres of Automotive Gas Oil despite receiving ₦705 million upfront payment, leading to litigation that ultimately resulted in a court-enforced settlement.

After years of litigation and substantial legal expense, a successful litigant obtains a favorable court judgment in Nigeria, only to face a harsh reality: the judgment debtor refuses to comply voluntarily, rendering both themselves and their assets inaccessible. What happens when court orders become mere pieces of paper, and how can successful litigants navigate the protracted and cumbersome enforcement proceedings that follow?

Every Court that is endowed with a particular jurisdiction has inherent powers not necessarily derivable from any law.

Generally, litigation commences with an originating process and ends with a judgment. With judgment therefore comes execution, bringing the case to a close.

The Court of Appeal's decision in Rothmans of Pall Mall v. Kasmal International Services Ltd. addresses a fundamental question of procedural fairness: what happens when a trial court enters judgment without properly notifying the defendant of hearing dates?