NIGERIA Trends and Developments Contributed by: Ituah Imhanze, Daze Nga, Damilola Raji and Ozioma Soludo, Kenna Partners
tions, citing unfair practices under international standards. What is certain is that the legal ten- sion between these approaches will continue to define labour law litigation in 2025 and beyond, with both employers and employees seeking clarity from the courts. Trends and Developments in Fundamental Rights Litigation for 2025 In recent years, fundamental rights litigation has become a growing area of focus in Nigerian law, with the courts taking a more proactive stance in enforcing constitutional rights under the Fun- damental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules 2009 (the “FREP Rules”). Total Exploration & Production (Nig) Ltd v Okwu & Ors (2024) LPELR-62623(SC) The Total Exploration & Production (Nig) Ltd v Okwu & Ors case marks a significant develop- ment in the area of fundamental rights enforce- ment in Nigeria. In this case, the Supreme Court of Nigeria addressed the procedural issue of whether multiple applicants can jointly file a sin- gle action to enforce their rights under the FREP Rules. The case involved a group of applicants seeking redress for alleged violations of their fundamental rights, and raised the question of procedural competence in multi-party applica- tions. Key issue addressed The main issue was whether the FREP Rules permit joint applications where multiple indi- viduals claim their fundamental rights were vio- lated under similar or identical circumstances. This issue arose because of previous conflicting decisions of the Court of Appeal, with some rul- ings holding that each applicant must file sepa- rate actions, while others allowed for collective filings. In the more recent case of Udo v Rob- son & Ors (2018) LPELR-45183 (CA), the Court
of Appeal decided that more than one person cannot apply to enforce a right under the FREP Rules. The Supreme Court’s decision The Supreme Court in Total Exploration & Pro- duction (Nig) Ltd v Okwu & Ors resolved this controversy by affirming that joint applications are procedurally competent as long as the claims arise from a common set of facts. The court emphasised the importance of promoting judicial efficiency and reducing procedural tech- nicalities that could obstruct access to justice. It also highlighted that the FREP Rules ensure that individuals whose rights are violated can seek redress without facing unnecessary pro- cedural hurdles. By allowing joint applications, the court underscored the need for flexibility in handling fundamental rights claims, particularly in cases involving groups or communities with common grievances. Implications for future litigation Greater access to justice for groups The decision paves the way for collective enforcement of fundamental rights, especially for marginalised groups facing systemic viola- tions. This decision will encourage more groups of individuals, whether workers, communities or other vulnerable parties, to jointly file claims, reducing the financial and procedural burden of filing multiple separate actions. Judicial efficiency The Supreme Court has enhanced judicial effi- ciency by allowing joint applications. This deci- sion reduces the risk of conflicting judgments from multiple cases arising from the same facts. It also prevents the courts from being inundated with identical or overlapping claims, thus speed-
1060 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook