NIGERIA Law and Practice Contributed by: Adeyinka Aderemi, Omono Blessing Omaghomi and Ibukun Enigbokan, Streamsowers & Köhn
• the construction of any written instrument, includ- ing a statue. As mentioned in 1.1 History and Policy Drivers of the Legislative Regime , Order 9 Rule 4 (1) of the FHC Rules 2019 provides that class actions can be insti- tuted with regard to trade marks, copyright or patents and designs. Order 13 Rule 11 (1) of the National Industrial Court of Nigeria Civil Procedure Rules 2017 (the “NICN Rules”) empowers one person or more to sue or be sued on behalf of or for the benefit of persons so interested with regard to labour and employment law matters. The NICN Rules do not expressly refer to such actions as class actions but as actions by numerous persons with same interest in a suit. Order 13 Rule 15 (1) of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja (Civil Procedure) Rules 2018 expanded the scope of the class action regime for suits instituted in the Federal Capital Territory by pro- viding that class actions can be brought for proceed- ings concerning: • the administration of estates; • property subject to a trust; • land held under customary law as family or com- munity property; • the construction of any written instrument, includ- ing a statute; • torts; or • any other class action. For an order of class action to be granted, Nigerian courts must ascertain that the class of persons cannot be ascertained (or readily ascertained) or be found. 2.3 Definition of Collective Redress/Class Actions There is no statutory definition of a class action or col- lective redress save for the provisions in procedural rules of the various courts in Nigeria. The common denominator in the various rules of court is that class actions are actions where one or more persons are appointed by the judge to represent that person(s) or class or members of the class in a lawsuit where the person, class or some members of the class inter-
ested in the lawsuit cannot be ascertained or cannot readily be ascertained – or, if ascertained, cannot be found ‒ or for purposes of expediency and efficiency if they can be ascertained or found. Nigerian courts have also interpreted what constitutes a class action. In the cases of Abraham Adesanya v President of Federal Republic of Nigeria (1981) 5 SC 69 and Gallaher Ltd & Another v British American Tobacco Co Ltd & Others (2015) 13 NWLR (Part 1476) 325, it was held that a class action must be centred on the principle of commonality – ie, the claims and defences of the representative/s must arise from com- mon factual questions or legal interests shared with the larger group in order for the larger group to be protected. In the case of Babalola v Apple Inc (2021) 15 NWLR 193, the appellate court ‒ in accordance with Black’s Law Dictionary – defined a “class action” as “a law- suit in which the court authorises a single person or a small group of people to represent the interests of a larger group, specifically, a lawsuit in which the con- venience either of the public or of the interested par- ties requires that the case be settled through litigation by or against only a part of the group of similarly situ- ated persons and in which a person whose interests are or may be affected does not have an opportunity to protect his or her interests by appearing person- ally or through a personally selected representative, or through a person specially appointed to act as a trustee or guardian”. In this case, the appellate court further pronounced on the peculiarity of class action as follows: “In a class action, the class must be so large that individual suits would be impracticable. There must be legal or factual questions common to the class. The claims or defenc- es of the representative parties must adequately pro- tect the interests of the class.”
204 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook