Accuracy of Employees Records: Spotting some data protection issues from the facts of Ologe v Corporate Affairs Commission as decided by the National Industrial Court | By Olumide Babalola
Coincidentally, I penned this article today – 18 March 2025) – a day the Nigerian Bar Association Data Protection Committee (which I modestly chair) holds its inaugural webinar titled “Data Protection in Nigeria: Milking A New Practice Area” to further sensitize lawyers on why they should take issues of data protection more seriously.
In his characteristic manner, Mr. Folabi Kuti, SAN, one of the foremost labour and employment lawyers in our country had shared an interesting decision of the National Industrial Court between Olumide Abayomi Ologe and Corporate Affairs Commission & Anor. (unreported Suit No. NICN/ABJ/375/2024) where the court ruled on the effect of a letter of promotion which was delivered to an ex-employee two years after his resignation. Outside the labour law issues of facts and law, I spotted some quick lessons in data protection from the facts thus:
The Importance of Rectifying Employee Records under the Nigeria Data Protection Act 2023
The Claimant resigned in December 2022, his records ought to have been rectified to reflect his status as ex-employee and his file moved to the appropriate storage section/folder whether manual or electronic. The Nigeria Data Protection Act 2023 (NDPA) mandates organizations to uphold the rights of individuals regarding the processing of personal data, in this case storage. One of the key rights under this Act is the right to rectification (section 34(1)(c), which allows individuals to ensure that their personal data is accurate, complete, and up-to-date.
In the case of an employee who resigns, it is crucial for the employer to update the individual’s records in a timely manner. For instance, if an employee, such as the Claimant, resigns in December 2022, their employment status should be immediately reflected in both manual and electronic records. This is not just a matter of internal housekeeping; it’s a legal obligation to ensure that the employee’s status is accurately documented and that their data is properly handled.
The NDPA envisions that once an employee ceases to be part of an organization, their personal data should no longer be classified as “active” in the organization’s system. The employer must ensure that the former employee’s file is moved to the appropriate storage section or folder—whether in physical archives or electronically. Failure to do so could violate the employee’s right to rectification, which could lead to legal consequences for the organization as a result on the ensuing confusion.
Moving the data to the correct storage ensures the security and privacy of the ex-employee’s data while complying with the principles of data minimization and purpose limitation – these are obligations provided in the Act. Keeping outdated or incorrect employment information can not only result in potential data breaches but also exposes the organization to legal liabilities for non-compliance as well as payment of entitlements to ex-employees as claimed in Ologe’s case.
It is advised that organizations must prioritize the rectification of personal data records and ensure that any data about former employees is appropriately updated, secured, and archived in accordance with the Nigeria Data Protection Act 2023. This step is essential not only for legal compliance but also to protect employees privacy and data subjects rights.
The Principle of Accuracy Under the NDPA: Consequences of Misleading Employment Records
The NDPA provides certain principles designed for entities to ensure that personal data is handled responsibly. One of the principles is the “accuracy” principle (section 24(1)(e), which mandates that personal data must be accurate, complete, and kept up-to-date. This principle is fundamental in safeguarding individuals’ rights to have their data correctly represented, and it holds particular significance in the context of (current or past) employee records.
In the case of a Claimant who resigned in December 2022, his employment status and position within the organization should have been promptly updated to reflect his actual status as an ex-employee. However, an issue arose when the employer issued a letter of promotion to the Claimant – after two years of his resignation, recognising to him as a “Director” rather than his correct position of “Principal Manager” before resignation. The employer explained its position in court, arguing that the Claimant’s last official role was that of Principal Manager and that the Claimant ought not to have countenanced the letter and its contents. This discrepancy raises concerns under the NDPA’s accuracy principle.
The principle of accuracy mandates that all personal data, including employment records, must be kept precise and free from errors. Referring to an individual by a title that does not correspond to their actual position creates misleading information and violates the obligation to maintain accurate records. In this case, addressing the Claimant as a “Director” in the promotion letter, despite their last position being “Principal Manager,” represents an inaccuracy in the personal data of the Claimant, which led to the ex-employee’s demand for arrears of salaries and entitlements as a director. The error in the promotion letter also highlights a failure on the part of the employer to update and rectify the Claimant’s records in a timely manner following his resignation. According to the NDPA, an organization must ensure that any personal data held, such as job titles, is both accurate and up-to-date. Failure to amend such records can be interpreted as non-compliance with the data protection dictates.
Conclusion
Concluding, the failure to correct the Claimant’s employment records, particularly in addressing him as a “Director” in a letter written in January 2024 – two years after his resignation, is misleading as it constitutes a clear violation of the rectification and accuracy principles under the Nigeria Data Protection Act 2023. The Act mandates that personal data must be accurate, complete, and kept up-to-date, especially when an individual’s employment status changes. By continuing to refer to the Claimant by an incorrect job title, the employer has not only breached the legal obligation to rectify and maintain accurate records but has also undermined the integrity of the data processing practices. It is crucial for organizations to prioritize timely updates and ensure that all personal data, including employment titles and statuses, reflect the true and current state of affairs to remain compliant with the NDPA and protect the rights of the data subject. As a result of the misleading letter, the employee can maintain an action under the Nigeria Data Protection Act 2023 especially since he has suffered some injury (financial, psychological, emotional) by the employers’ processing activities.
Abisoye Coker Appointed as Alternate Chair of the Fundraising Sub-Committee for NBA Lagos Law Week 2025
The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) Lagos Branch has appointed Abisoye Coker as the Alternate Chair of the Fundraising Sub-Committee for the upcoming NBA Lagos Law Week 2025, scheduled for June 14th – 20th, 2025. This year’s theme, “Reimagining the Practice of Law: Ethics, Innovation, and the Future of Legal Services,” will explore the intersection of law, technology, and policy, emphasizing the evolving role of legal practitioners in a rapidly shifting global landscape.
A seasoned corporate lawyer, entrepreneur, and financial policy advocate, Abisoye chairs the board of KiaKia Global Inc., a leading payments solutions company, and also serves as the Managing Director of KiaKia FX UK, the group’s payments systems technology and advisory firm. With a strong focus on FX policy reforms in Africa, he has established himself as a key thought leader in financial regulations and corporate governance.
Speaking on his appointment, Abisoye underscored the importance of innovation and adaptability in the legal profession, particularly in an era of fast-changing financial policies and regulatory frameworks. He noted that as global economic structures continue to evolve, legal practitioners must engage with emerging policies and technologies to remain effective, forward-thinking, and prepared for the future.
Amongst other topical discussions, NBA Lagos Law Week 2025 will feature a high-level roundtable discussion on the impact of the Central Bank of Nigeria’s (CBN) Foreign Exchange Reform Policies introduced in 2024.
Building a Thriving Legal Career: A Guide for Young Lawyer
Embarking on a career in law is as exciting as it is challenging. The legal profession offers immense opportunities for growth and impact, but success requires strategy, perseverance, and adaptability. Here are some key pieces of advice for young lawyers looking to build a fulfilling and thriving career:
1. Embrace Lifelong Learning
The legal landscape is constantly evolving with new laws, technologies, and societal changes. Stay ahead by consistently updating your knowledge. Attend seminars, enroll in continuing legal education (CLE) courses, and keep up with landmark cases. Remember, a well-informed lawyer is a valuable lawyer.
2. Find Your Niche
While it’s important to start with a broad understanding of law, identifying a specialty early on can set you apart. Whether it’s corporate law, intellectual property, criminal defense, or tech law, choose an area that aligns with your passion and skills. A niche focus makes you an expert, not just a generalist.
3. Build Strong Relationships
The legal field thrives on connections. Cultivate relationships with colleagues, mentors, and clients. Attend networking events, engage with your professional community, and never underestimate the power of a thoughtful follow-up email. Building a reputation for being approachable and reliable will open doors.
4. Develop Your Soft Skills
Technical legal knowledge is essential, but don’t overlook the importance of soft skills like communication, negotiation, and emotional intelligence. Effective listening and clear articulation are key to understanding clients’ needs and persuading others, whether in court or during negotiations.
5. Master Time Management
The legal profession can be demanding, with tight deadlines and high expectations. Learn to prioritize tasks, delegate when necessary, and avoid burnout. Tools like task managers, calendars, and time-tracking apps can be lifesavers.
6. Stay Ethical
Integrity is the backbone of a lasting legal career. Uphold the highest ethical standards in all your dealings. Trust is hard to build but easy to lose, and your reputation as a lawyer will precede you in all professional interactions.
7. Leverage Technology
The legal industry is rapidly embracing technology. Familiarize yourself with legal research tools, case management software, and emerging fields like artificial intelligence in law. Being tech-savvy will make you more efficient and competitive.
8. Seek Mentorship
Having a mentor can provide invaluable guidance as you navigate the complexities of the legal world. A mentor can offer insights into career decisions, introduce you to their network, and provide a sense of direction when challenges arise.
9. Take Care of Yourself
The demands of a legal career can take a toll on your well-being. Prioritize self-care, maintain a healthy work-life balance, and don’t hesitate to seek help when needed. A happy, well-rested lawyer is a more effective lawyer.
10. Set Long-Term Goals
While focusing on immediate tasks is important, always keep an eye on the bigger picture. Define what success looks like for you, whether it’s becoming a partner, starting your own practice, or advocating for social change. Regularly revisit your goals and adjust your strategies accordingly.
Starting out in law is a journey full of learning and growth. With dedication, resilience, and a focus on both personal and professional development, young lawyers can carve out a path to success and make a meaningful impact. Remember, every case you take on is an opportunity to learn and grow. Your future in law is as bright as you make it!
The Legalnaija Bookstore is a hub for every lawyer, law student, and legal enthusiast looking to enhance their knowledge and skills. Whether you’re preparing for your next big case or expanding your expertise, we’ve got you covered with curated titles that deliver value at every level.
What You’ll Find in Our Store:
– Law Reports: Access essential judicial decisions to strengthen your case law research and arguments.
– Specialized Textbooks: Dive deep into areas like corporate law, criminal law, and intellectual property with expertly written texts.
– Practical Guides: Explore resources packed with templates, strategies, and procedural tips to navigate your legal journey with confidence.
– Statutory and Legislative Compilations: Stay ahead with books containing relevant Nigerian statutes, codes, and regulations.
– Insights on Emerging Trends: Get ahead of the curve with books on tech law, data privacy, and other evolving legal topics.
Why Legalnaija Bookstore?
– Stay Updated: Our collection ensures you’re always informed about the latest legal developments.
– Save Time: Find ready-to-use tools and guidance that make your work more efficient.
– Expand Your Expertise: Gain insights from seasoned professionals and specialized resources.
– Enhance Your Credibility: Build a legal library that reflects your professionalism and dedication.
Elevate your legal practice or studies with resources that add real value. Start building the library your career deserves today at [Legalnaija Bookstore](https://www.legalnaija.com/store).
Growing Vandalism on Energy Infrastructure, Expert demands Capital Punishment for Vandals.
Lagos, Nigeria – Tolulope Aderemi, a partner at Perchstone & Graeys LP, has raised alarm over the escalating vandalism of critical infrastructure in Nigeria, which has significantly impacted the nation’s liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports. In a recent interview with a national television network, Aderemi revealed that five of the Nigeria LNG Limited (NLNG) trains are currently non-operational due to acts of vandalism, leading to a notable decrease in LNG output.
Aderemi emphasized the need for the NLNG to revisit its original pipeline security strategies, specifically the surveillance and grass-cutting contracts that had previously proven effective. “These strategies have shown to be successful, and there is no justification for abandoning a model that works,” he stated, advocating for the application of technology to enhance the protection of oil and gas infrastructure.
In a more drastic call to action, Aderemi urged the Nigerian Federal Government to implement capital punishment for individuals caught vandalizing pipelines, highlighting the economic significance of these assets, which generate approximately $865 million annually for the country.
The urgency of Aderemi’s message is underscored by the current LNG landscape in Europe, where the European Union imports 17.5 million tonnes of LNG from Russia. With expectations for increased purchases in 2024, the EU is actively seeking to reduce its dependence on Russian LNG by 2030. However, alternatives like Algeria and Nigeria currently meet only 10% and 4.2% of the demand, respectively, forcing Europe to rely heavily on the US and Russia.
Given Nigeria’s substantial gas reserves, Aderemi believes the country must strategically position itself to fulfill the EU’s LNG requirements. With the recent completion of Train 7, NLNG’s total capacity has reached 30 million tonnes, which could potentially satisfy the EU’s demand if all seven trains are operational.
In conclusion, Aderemi called on the government to designate NLNG infrastructure as a ‘critical government asset’ and consider the establishment of a dedicated ‘Marine Army’ for its protection. He reiterated the importance of reverting to effective surveillance and grass-cutting models to safeguard Nigeria’s vital energy resources.
We are excited to invite you to a webinar hosted by the NBA Data Protection Committee on 18th March 2025 at 4:00 PM (WAT), titled “Data Protection in Nigeria: Milking A New Practice Area.”
As the landscape of data protection continues to evolve globally and within Nigeria, it is becoming increasingly important for legal professionals to understand the key elements driving this emerging field.
Whether you’re a litigator, corporate professional, or simply interested in the field of data protection, this session will provide valuable insights from industry experts and thought leaders.
Please find the event details and flyer attached for more information. We look forward to your participation in what promises to be an engaging and informative discussion.
THE DILEMMA OF SERVING COURT PROCESSES VIA A COURIER COMPANY: DOES THIS CONSTITUTE SUBSTITUTED SERVICE IN ALL CIRCUMSTANCES?[1]
Introduction
The service of a process is of fundamental importance to the jurisdiction and vires of a court.[2] The necessity of this act is hinged on the fundamental right to fair hearing provided for in the Constitution.[3] Where there is no evidence of service of a court process, the legality of the proceedings and any verdict thereof becomes questionable and tantamount to a nullity.[4] The service of a process and how it was effected therefore becomes crucial and paramount in determining the jurisdiction of a court. The purpose of service is for the recipient to become aware of a pending suit or case instituted in court and an opportunity to defend the suit.[5] The rules of the various courts have provided for service and the appropriate mode to effect such service. Nevertheless, the issue of service has elicited debates especially as to the appropriate mode of service which has led to the interpretation of the Rules by the Court. This Article weighs in on the service of an Originating Process by a courier company on a defendant or respondent whose process has been acknowledged by such a receiving party. Does the mere fact of using a “courier company” change the nature of such service to substituted service?
What Does the Law say?
An Originating Process must always be served personally to the named defendant or respondent.[6] The High Court of Lagos State (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2019[7] provides for personal service of an Originating Process. It states thus:
“The Process Server shall effect service of an Originating Process on a party by delivering a copy of the process duly certified as prescribed by Order 8 Rule 2(3) and Rule 4 personally on the party to be served.”
However, where a process cannot be served on a defendant or respondent personally due to several reasons, the Rules of Court permit substituted service in order not to frustrate a suit. This position is expressed in the provisions of Order 9 Rule 5 of the Lagos State High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2019 which states as follows:
“Where personal service of an originating Process is required by these Rules and a Judge is satisfied that prompt personal service cannot be effected, the Judge may upon application by the Claimant make such order for substituted service as may seem just, including service by electronic mails.”[8]
An application must be brought before the Court with an affidavit setting forth the grounds upon which the application is made.[9] It is however important to note that an application for substituted service can be brought regardless of whether or not personal service was attempted.[10] This is solely at the discretion of the Court. As it is a discretionary power, it is advisable for a deponent to state reasons why personal service is not possible in the circumstances to enable the Court exercise its discretion in favour of the applicant.
Service of a Process by Courier Company on the Defendant
To address this issue, it is pertinent to know who is endorsed, in law, to effect service. The Rules of Court have provided for persons authorized to serve an Originating Process and they include the Sheriff, Deputy Sheriff, Bailiff, Special Marshal, or other officer of the Court.[11] The Chief Judge may also appoint and register any Law Chambers, Courier Company, or any other person to serve Court processes and such person shall be called “a Process Server”.[12] A courier company is thus approved to serve an Originating Process where appointed and registered by the Chief Judge. Surprisingly, most courier companies are not registered as “Process Servers” in several jurisdictions in Nigeria.
In practice, an applicant typically seeks an order of Court to serve a defendant or respondent through substituted means, such as using a courier service. However, where the Plaintiff knows the Defendant’s valid and current address and uses a courier company duly registered as a “Process Server” to deliver Court processes, which the Defendant acknowledges receipt, does this constitute personal service? Or does the mere use of a courier company automatically render it a substituted service, thereby necessitating an order of Court?
3.1 Distinguishing Personal Service from Substituted Service
Personal Service means delivering to a party named therein a copy of the process duly certified as prescribed by the Rules of Court.[13] It has been rightly observed by some legal commentators that to constitute personal service, as a general rule, the process in question must be delivered personally to the person intended to be served. The person served is also required to acknowledge receipt of service.[14] Substituted service means no more than any other mode of service than personal service where the rules require personal service.[15] This distinction is very important, in that while personal service does not require an Order of Court, substituted service does. Where a service is carried out by substituted means without an Order of Court, such service becomes a nullity.[16]
An application for substituted service is usually brought when an applicant finds it difficult or impracticable to serve the defendant in question and also in instances where the defendant has no known address; is evading service; and/or has changed address, etc.[17] Order 7 Rule 11(2) of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2018 has given various ways, though not exhaustive, through which service by substituted means can be carried out. They include:
Delivery to an adult inmate at the usual or last known place of abode or business of the person to be served.
Delivery to an agent or someone who can deliver the document to the Defendant.
Advertisement in federal gazette or newspaper circulating within jurisdiction.
At the principal courthouse or public resort within the division where the suit is instituted or the last known place of abode.
Through e-mail and courier service or any other means convenient to the Court.[18]
www.legalnaija.com/store
3.2 Argument on the Issue
This Article has reviewed the relevant provisions of the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules of various Courts on personal service. The general definition of what constitutes “personal service” emphasizes direct service to the named defendant(s). An argument could therefore be made that where a Defendant is served with an Originating Process personally, it is indeed personal service, and the agency or medium used for effecting such service is immaterial. It is the view of this author that the mere fact of service of a Court process through a courier company should not ipso facto tantamount to substituted service. The pertinent question that should be asked is: did the defendant receive the process personally? In providing a guide on when substituted service can be employed, the Supreme Court in Kida v. Ogunmola[19], per Dahiru Musdapher, JSC, stated thus:
“Substituted service can only be employed when for any reason, a defendant cannot be served personally with the processes within the jurisdiction of the court for example when the defendant cannot be traced or when it is known that the defendant is evading service.”[20] (Emphasis mine)
Moreover, in Akeredolu v. Abraham & Ors.[21], the Supreme Court restated the essence of substituted service in the following words:
“Finally, the essence of substituted service is to convey to the relevant party the notice of the pending case in which he is involved and the date he is required to appear in Court, since it is difficult to serve him through formal service. In the instant case, there is evidence that the Court processes were brought to the notice of the appellant. He cannot be heard to urge that the service be set aside for being illegal.”[22] (Emphasis mine)
The various Rules of Court have provided for persons who are authorized to effect service[23] and also for the appointment and registration of Law Chambers, courier companies, or any person for the purposes of service who are called “Process Servers”.[24] Consequently, where an Originating Process or any other Court process cannot be served through a bailiff or other officer of the Court, a party can use a registered Process Server to effect service. This reality was acknowledged by the Supreme Court in the case of State v. Ekuma,[25] thus:
“Service of processes may be affected by registered reputable courier companies, recognised and authorised by the Chief Judge in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the registered courier companies may be assigned to a court with criminal jurisdiction as a process server in accordance with section 242(1). The Attorney-General of the Federation or a person so authorised or the police may serve on a person whom the prosecutor wishes to call as witness, a witness summons or writ of subpoena. Proof of service of a process or document shall be endorsed by the process server effecting the service, and shall be filed in the court’s file.”[26] (Emphasis mine)
It is the position of this author that personal service of a Court process through a “registered” courier company or Law Chambers is proper, valid and acceptable personal service in law. This position was endorsed by the Court of Appeal in the case of Dike v. Key Key Constr. Limited,[27] where the following was held:
“By virtue of Order 7, rules 1, 2, 3 and 4 of the High Court of Enugu State (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2006, service of originating and other processes shall be made by a Sheriff, Deputy Sheriff, Bailiff, Special Marshal or other officer of the court. The Chief Judge may also appoint and register any courier company or any other person to serve court processes and such person shall be called process server. Where a party is represented by a legal practitioner, service of court process of which personal service is not required may be made on such legal practitioner or any legal practitioner in his chambers or on the clerk or secretary of such chambers. The process server shall serve an originating process by delivering to the party to be served, a copy of the process duly certified as prescribed by Order 6 rule 2(3) of the Rules.” (Emphasis mine)
Since an Order of Court is not needed where an officer of Court effects personal service, it will be indeed superfluous to require an Order of Court for a courier company that is duly appointed as a “Process Server” to effect personal service. However, where a courier company is not registered as a “Process Server” in line with the Rules of Court, it is the view of this author that the proper application to be made to the Court is an application for leave to use the “unregistered” courier company to effect personal service and this, in substance and form, is different from an application for substituted service via a courier company. It is only when personal service proves improbable or impracticable due to evasion of service, threat, or other factors, that an order to serve the Defendant through substituted means becomes necessary and expedient.
Conclusion
The essence of service is to put a party on notice; more so, the emphasis on personal service is that a party to a suit is served with the originating documents by direct handing over of the said documents. Where this is done and there is an acknowledgment of such service, fixation on the agent or medium of delivery becomes superfluous. A bailiff or officer of Court should always be used for service, especially within jurisdiction, however, in instances where the Defendant is outside jurisdiction, a courier company is usually used for such service. Direct service on a party by a courier company[28] is personal service and obviates the need for an order for substituted service. The machinery of justice should be efficient and pragmatic and not bogged down by technicalities. This point was reiterated in the case of Abayomi & Anor. v. AG Ondo State,[29] where Honourable Justice Ali Abubakar Babandi Gumel, JCA, opined as follows:
“Rules of Court must be obeyed where they are consistent with fundamental principles of justice and aimed at deciding cases and appeals on the merit. The rules are made to guide the Court in the administration of justice. They should not however be seen as immutable. Rather, they are for convenience and orderly hearing of causes in Court, to help the cause of justice and not to defeat justice. Now, interest of justice will abhor a situation where the parties to an action or even the Courts follow rules slavishly which impede or hinder the promotion of justice.”[30]
www.legalnaija.com
[1]Nsikak E. Effiong, Associate, Oasis Barristers & Solicitors Abuja, Nigeria.
[2] See the following cases: Peterside v. Odili (2022) 17 NWLR (Pt. 1860) 549 (SC); C.G.G. (Nig.) Ltd. v. Aminu (2013) 7 NWLR (Pt. 1459) 577 (SC) at p. 96, paras. D – E; Maduka v. Ubah (2015) 11 NWLR (Pt. 1470) 201 (CA) at p. 331, paras. D – F; Dickson v. Okoi (2003) 16 NWLR (Pt. 846) 397 (CA) at pp. 411, paras. C – E; p. 415, paras. G – H; and Ali v. Albishir (2008) 3 NWLR (Pt. 1073) 94 (CA) at p.134, paras. E – F; p. 137, paras. G – H; p. 154, paras. B – D.
[3] See, Section 36 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended). See also, the case of Akpokiniovo v. Agas (2004) 10 NWLR (Pt. 881) 394 (CA) at p. 422, paras. D – F.
[4] See the following cases: Aondoakaa v. Obot (2022) 5 NWLR (Pt. 1824) 523 (SC) at p. 568, paras. A – B; CBN v. Oodo (2021) 18 NWLR (Pt. 1809) 461 (CA) at p.p. 508 – 509, paras. D – A; Ayogu v. Nnamani (2004) 15 NWLR (Pt. 895) 134; Makeri Smelting Co. Ltd. v. Access Bank (Nig.) Plc (2002) 7 NWLR (Pt. 766) 447; Societe General Bank (Nig.) Ltd. v. Adewunmi (2003) 10 NWLR (Pt. 829) 526; ACB Int. Bank Plc v. Otu (2008) 3 NWLR (Pt. 1073) 179.
[5] See the following cases: Otobaimere v. Akporehe (2004) 14 NWLR (Pt. 894) 591 (CA); Ononye v. Chukwuma (2005) 17 NWLR (Pt. 953) 90 (CA) at p. 111, paras. A – B; and Ore v. Akanbi (2021) 14 NWLR (Pt. 1795) 1 (CA) at p. 43, paras. F – B.
[6] See, Nwankwo v. Kano (2010) 6 NWLR (Pt. 1189) 62.
[7] Order 9 Rule 2 of the said Rules of Court. See also, Order 7 Rule 2 of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2018.
[8] See also, Order 7 Rule 11 of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja (Civil Procedure) Rules 2018.
[9] See, Order 9 Rule 5(2) of the High Court of Lagos State (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2019; and Order 7 Rule 11(2) of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2018.
[10] See, Zakirai v. Muhammad & Ors (2017) LPELR – 42349 (SC) at p. 40.
[11] See, Order 9 Rule 1 of the High Court of Lagos State (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2019; and Order 7 Rule 1 High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2018.
[12] See, Order 9 Rule 1 (2) of the High Court of Lagos State (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2019; and Order 7 Rule 1 of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2018.
[13] See, Order 9 Rule 2 of the said Rules. See also, Order 7 Rule 2 of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2018. See the following cases: M.G.F .Nig. Ltd. v. Gwus International Ltd. (2001) 9 NWLR (Pt. 718) 413 (CA); Ononye v. Chukwuma (2005) 17 NWLR (Pt. 953) 90 (CA) at pp. 114 – 115, paras. G – D; and Kenfrank (Nig.) Ltd. v. U.B.N. Plc. (2002) 15 NWLR (Pt. 789) 46 (CA).
[14] Maureen Stanley-Idum and James Agaba, Civil Litigation in Nigeria (Revised edn, Nelag and Company Limited 2017) 298.
[16] See, Ihedioha v. Okorocha (2016) 1 NWLR (Pt. 1492) 147 (SC).
[17] See the following cases: Carribbean Trading Fidelity Corporation v. N.N.P.C (1992) 7 NWLR (Pt. 252) 161 (CA); Mark v. Eke (2004) 5 NWLR (Pt. 865) 54 (SC) at p. 80, paras. E – G; and Peterside v. Odili (2022) 17 NWLR (Pt. 1860) 549 (SC) at p. 573, paras. C – E.
[18] See the following cases where these modes of substituted service were interpreted and applied: Emeka v. Okoroafor (2017) 11 NWLR (Pt. 1577) 410 (SC) at pp. 469 – 470, paras. H – C; Abutu v. Onyedima (2003) 17 NWLR (Pt. 849) 359 (CA); Halid Pharm. Ltd. v. Solomon (2015) 5 NWLR (Pt. 1453) 565 (CA); Ore v. Akanbi (2021) 14 NWLR (Pt. 1795) 1 (CA); and Okereke v. Ejiofor (1996) 3 NWLR (Pt. 434) 90 (CA) at pp. 101 – 102, paras. H – B.
[22] Ibid., at pp. 59 – 60, paras. E _ A, per Honourable Justice Paul Adamu Galumje, JSC.
[23] See, Order 7 Rule 1 of High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2018; and Order 9 Rule 5(2) of the High Court of Lagos State (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2019.
[24] See, Order 9 Rule 2 of the High Court of Lagos State (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2019; and Order 7 Rule 2 of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2018.
[28] Courier service companies that have achieved significant recognition and are widely used for instance, DHL Express, UPS, FedEx etc. should be automatically recognised by the courts as “process servers”.
Davidson Oturu is the author is the book – Fintech Law and Practice In Nigeria published in 2024. He is a corporate lawyer and investor with nearly two decades of experience at the intersection of law, finance, and technology. As the General Partner at Nubia Capital, a venture capital firm, he leads investments in tech-enabled startups across Africa, driving innovation and growth in emerging markets.
Previously, Davidson was a Partner at AELEX, a leading law firm in Nigeria and Ghana, where he headed the firm’s Startups, Innovation, and Technology Practice. His legal expertise covers a broad spectrum, including intellectual property, regulatory compliance, and corporate/commercial law. He has served a diverse clientele in sectors such as fintech, media, telecommunications, IT, private equity, and financial services.
Davidson’s professional journey is marked by a commitment to mentorship, education, and early-stage startup investments. He has been recognized as a leading legal practitioner in fintech and corporate/commercial practice, with commendations in prestigious directories such as Chambers Fintech Guide, IFLR 1000, Legal 500, Who’s Who Legal, WTR 1000, IP Stars, and Chambers Global.
His contributions extend beyond his legal practice. Davidson was appointed to the Presidential Advisory Council for conceptualizing and drafting the Nigeria Startup Act, where he led the drafting team to address regulatory and financial challenges for tech startups.
He was then appointed by the President in April 2023 to Nigeria’s National Council for Digital Innovation & Entrepreneurship, a Council responsible for driving the Startup Act’s implementation.
He has served as an executive member of the Fintech Roadmap Committee, established by Nigeria’s Securities and Exchange Commission, to create a framework for fintech in the Nigerian capital market. Additionally, he has held different positions nationally and internationally, including serving as the Chair of the Legislation and Regulation Committee, as well as the Trademark Office Practice Committee for the Middle East, Africa, and South Asia at the International Trademarks Association (INTA).
Actively advising tech startups and serving on boards as a non-executive director, Davidson is also a mentor at the Founder Institute and Techstars, two globally renowned accelerators. In 2022, he launched the Davidson Oturu Mentorship Programme and a Law School Scholarship Scheme that has so far sponsored twenty indigent students to Nigerian Law School, demonstrating his unwavering dedication to nurturing the next generation of legal and business professionals.
A prolific writer and sought-after speaker, Davidson has been featured in numerous journals and publications. He regularly shares his insights on law, finance, and technology at both local and international events, contributing significantly to the global discourse in these fields.
Davidson Oturu’s academic credentials include an LL.B from the University of Ibadan, an LL.M in International Business Law from the University of Cumbria, an MBA from Queen Mary University of London, and participation in the Oxford Fintech Programme at the University of Oxford.
We hope this message finds you well. We are thrilled to announce an exciting promotion on the Legalnaija Bookstore, and we wanted you to be the first to know!
For the entire week of February, we are offering fantastic discounts on our bookstore at . But that’s not all! With every purchase you make, you will receive a one-month premium subscription to the Legalnaija Directory.
Unlock the full potential of our directory at and enjoy access to a comprehensive collection of legal resources, exclusive articles, and much more.
Don’t miss out on this limited-time offer! Visit our bookstore, grab the resources you need, and take advantage of your free premium subscription to enhance your legal knowledge and professional network.
Reversal of Erroneous Bank Transfers: Are the Customary Courts Now Grabbing the Magistrates and High Courts’ Jurisdiction? A Passionate Call to the Chief Judges to stem this dangerous tide of jurisdictional Usurpation
By Olumide Babalola
In January 2025, when a financial institution was threatened with contempt proceedings and garnishee proceedings for their alleged failure to comply with an order of a Customary Court sitting in Oyo State, we were briefed to enter appearance, and I had to personally attend the court to contain the situation. The journey was about 40 minutes out of Ibadan to a remote village or town known as “Iroko.” On a lighter note, Google map could not even take me there, navigation satellite rather suggested Iroko TV.
It was my first appearance at a Customary court – an unfamiliar terrain and under unimagined circumstances – Garnishee proceedings bearing threatened contempt proceedings against our client. Happily, I was able to get the client discharged but the demeanour of the learned judges confirmed to me that such proceedings might have become a staple cause in their courts. These courts are historically and primarily tasked with resolving issues related to land disputes, succession, inheritance, and matrimonial causes based on customary law as they have become an integral part of the country’s judicial structure. However, a troubling trend has emerged in recent years: cases involving erroneous bank transfers are being litigated in these same courts, raising serious questions about the boundaries of their jurisdiction and the proper application of the law.
Customary Courts and Their Limited Jurisdiction
The jurisdiction of customary courts in Nigeria is clearly defined and confined to matters relating to native law and custom. Disputes involving land ownership, inheritance rights, and matrimonial issues are the bread and butter of customary courts, as these matters are deeply connected to the social fabric and traditions of local communities.
However, an emerging and concerning phenomenon has seen matters unrelated to customary law, such as disputes over erroneous bank transfers, being brought before these courts. Such disputes are often based on banking services, torts of negligence, or breaches of contract—none of which fall within the scope of native law or custom. These cases, rooted in modern financial transactions and contract law, do not have the cultural or traditional relevance that would justify their adjudication by customary courts.
Jurisdictional Conflict: The Case of Erroneous Bank Transfers
Erroneous bank transfers typically arise when funds are transferred in error from one bank customer’s account to another, often due to clerical mistakes or technological glitches. The legal remedy for such issues typically lies in contract law, tort law, or consumer protection statutes, and the proper venue for these cases is a court with general jurisdiction over civil matters, such as a High Court or a Magistrates Court. Customary courts, on the other hand, are not equipped or authorized to adjudicate on these matters, as they fall outside the realm of customary or native law.vThe growing trend of litigating banking-related issues in customary courts, particularly those concerning erroneous bank transfers, represents a jurisdictional overreach that risks undermining the integrity of the judicial system. It is critical to note that customary courts do not have the statutory or legal framework to address matters such as breaches of banking contracts or negligence claims, which are inherently tied to modern commercial law.
Garnishee Proceedings and Enforcement of Judgments
The problem is further compounded by the practice of enforcing judgments issued by customary courts through garnishee proceedings. Garnishee proceedings, governed by the Sheriffs and Civil Process Act (SCPA), are meant to be used by specific courts—namely, the High Courts and Magistrate Courts. The SCPA’s interpretation section explicitly states that only these two types of courts have the jurisdiction to issue Garnishee Orders to show cause, a process that allows creditors to collect debt directly from a third party holding the debtor’s funds, such as a bank. Yet, we are witnessing situations where customary courts, in the course of enforcing judgments, are invoking garnishee proceedings. This raises serious concerns, as these courts do not have the authority to do so under the SCPA, and such actions risk violating the clear division of responsibilities between different levels of the Nigerian court system.
Further complicating matters, the Customary Court Rules, including those under the Customary Courts Law of Lagos State, specifically vest the enforcement of money judgments with Magistrate Courts. For instance, Order 9 Rule 1 of the Lagos State Customary Court Rules clearly states that only Magistrates’ Courts have the power to enforce monetary judgments. This misalignment between the customary courts and the relevant enforcement mechanisms suggests a serious legal inconsistency that undermines the integrity of the enforcement process.
The Need for Judicial Reassessment
The judicial system in Nigeria, as in any country, thrives on clarity, consistency, and adherence to established legal principles. The increasing trend of bringing banking and financial disputes, such as erroneous bank transfers, before customary courts represents a disturbing erosion of this principle. Customary courts were not designed to adjudicate on issues pertaining to modern financial transactions, and their involvement in such matters only risks clouding their true purpose: to preserve and enforce native law and customs.
It is, therefore, crucial for the Chief Judges of respective states to address this jurisdictional issue. The involvement of customary courts in matters beyond their statutory remit not only jeopardizes the integrity of the judicial system but also creates confusion among litigants about the proper forum for their disputes. The judiciary must take steps to reaffirm the limited scope of customary courts and ensure that matters involving banking errors, breaches of contract, and negligence are directed to the appropriate courts with the necessary jurisdiction and expertise.
Our Colleagues at the Bar need to do better
In 2025, it is unimaginable that we would be arguing and filing objections on whether or not Customary courts have jurisdiction to entertain banker/customer disputes. The civil jurisdiction of these courts is identical nationwide. For context, section 22 and the first schedule of the Customary Courts Law, Chapter C19, Laws Of Lagos State, 2015 prescribes the court’s jurisdiction thus:
“(1) Unlimited jurisdiction in matrimonial causes and other matters between persons married under Customary Law or arising from or connected with a union contracted under Customary Law and related matters.
(2) Unlimited jurisdiction in suits relating to the guardianship and custody of children under Customary Law.
(3) A Customary Court shall have jurisdiction in causes and matters relating to inheritance upon intestacy and the administration of intestate estates under Customary Law provided that the Customary Court shall not have jurisdiction where the value of the property or claim exceed Five Hundred Thousand Naira (N500,000.00).
(4) A Customary Court shall have civil jurisdiction in other causes and matters as conferred under any bye-law passed by a local government provided the claim does not exceed Five Hundred Thousand Naira (N500,000.00).”
What runs through the provision is “customary law”, hence any matter that does not relate to customary law is beyond the reach of customary courts. Banker/customer relationship are within the precinct of banking law, torts law and law of contract except the reversal is to be made from a bank registered under customary law – I doubt if one exists in Nigeria.
Recommendations for Reform
The Chief Judges should issue directives or practice notes clarifying the jurisdictional limits of customary courts, particularly concerning banking and financial disputes. These directives should emphasize that customary courts are not competent to adjudicate matters involving erroneous bank transfers, contract disputes, or tort claims.
Conclusion
The judiciary is the cornerstone of any legal system, and it is vital that each level of the court system remains true to its function. While customary courts serve an important role in preserving and adjudicating matters of native law and custom, it is critical that their jurisdiction remains limited to those areas. The encroachment of banking and commercial disputes into these courts poses a threat to the clarity and efficiency of Nigeria’s judicial system. The Chief Judges of the respective states must take immediate action to clarify the jurisdiction of customary courts and prevent further jurisdictional overreach, ensuring that the legal system remains fair, transparent, and capable of handling the complex issues of modern society. If we are not careful, we may wake up one day to a maritime of fundamental rights matter before the customary courts. Let’s take heed while the sun is still out!
