Use the Lexology Getting The Deal Through tool to compare the answers in this article with those from other jurisdictions.

Domestic legislation

Attorney-client communications doctrine

Identify and describe your jurisdiction’s laws, regulations, professional rules and doctrines that protect communications between an attorney and a client from disclosure.

The main laws that regulate attorney-client communication in Nigeria are the Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners (2007), particularly Rule 19 thereof, which imposes a fiduciary duty of confidentiality on attorneys, generally referred to as legal practitioners in Nigeria, as follows: ‘all oral or written communication made by a client to his lawyer in the normal course of professional employment are privileged,’ thereby preventing disclosure of same to third parties.

In addition to the above, legal practitioners are bound by section 192 of the Evidence Act (2011), which prevents legal practitioners from disclosing any communications with their client made in the course of their professional employment, without having obtained the express consent of the client:

No legal practitioner shall at any time be permitted, unless with his client’s express consent, to disclose any communication made to him in the course and for the purpose of his employment . . . or to state the contents of documents which he has become acquainted in the course of his professional employment . . . or to disclose any advice given by him to his client.

Section 16 of the Freedom of Information Act (2011) also recognises attorney-client privilege as an exception to disclosure of information: ‘A public institution may deny an application for information that is subject to the following privileges - (a) legal practitioner-client privilege.’

Nigerian law also recognises the privilege ascribed to attorney-client communication under English common law as laid down in decisions such as that in Horn v Ricard (1975) 61 Cr App R 128 and R v Special Commissioner & Anorex parte Morgan Grenfell & Co Ltd (2002) UKHL to the effect that a client, in the process of obtaining sufficient advice, should feel safe in making disclosures to his or her attorney and such safety would be undermined if the client felt the attorney could readily disclose matters that are to be treated as confidential.

In-house and outside counsel

Describe any relevant differences in your jurisdiction between the status of private practitioners and in-house counsel, in terms of protections for attorney-client communications.

In order to practise as a legal practitioner in Nigeria, an individual’s name must be on the ‘roll’, which is a list, kept by the Registrar of the Supreme Court, of persons entitled to practise as such in Nigeria. No distinction is made between private practitioners and in-house counsel. Consequently, every legal practitioner is subject to the Rules of Professional Conduct and to the provisions of the Evidence Act, with regard to obligations related to the protection of attorney-client communications.

Under the Rules of Professional Conduct, the expression ‘lawyer’ is used, which is given a similar meaning to a ‘legal practitioner’, as defined under the Legal Practitioners Act (2004) as ‘a person entitled . . . to practise as a barrister or as a barrister and solicitor, either generally or for the purposes of any particular office or proceedings’.

Under the Evidence Act, the attorney owes this duty when acting ‘in the course of his professional employment’. So far as they are acting within their professional capacity as an attorney, any communication with a client they represent is considered a privileged communication.

Work-product doctrine

Identify and describe your jurisdiction’s laws, regulations, professional rules and doctrines that provide protection from disclosure of tangible material created in anticipation of litigation.

Under rule 19(1) of the Rules of Professional Conduct (2007), ‘all oral or written communication made by a client to his attorney in the normal course of professional employment are privileged’, therefore any tangible material created by an attorney as a result of any communication made by a client to an attorney in the normal course of his or her engagement as an attorney is privileged.

Under section 192(1) of the Evidence Act (2011), client confidentiality extends to the contents or condition of documents the attorney becomes acquainted with in the course and for the purpose of his or her professional employment, as well as any advice given by him or her to clients in this regard.

Likewise, section 36 of the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act (2000) protects the disclosure of any attorney-client privileged information or communication that came to the attorney’s knowledge for the purpose of prosecuting any pending proceeding (litigation).

Recent case law

Identify and summarise recent landmark decisions involving attorney-client communications and work product.

The doctrine of privileged communication is primarily enshrined in the English common law principle that clients must be entitled to give information freely to their attorney without having to concern themselves with the implications of making such disclosures.

The Supreme Court ruling in Musa Abubakar v E I Chuks SC 184/2003 held that, where litigation is concerned, any documentation that has as its contents information that is secret in nature and is caught by section 192 of the Evidence Act cannot be disclosed as the document will be considered as being subject to confidentiality, as long as such communications are not made in furtherance of illegal activities.

More recently, the Court of Appeal, in June 2017, refused to overturn a 2014 decision of the Federal High Court in Registered Trustees of the Nigerian Bar Association v AG Federation & Central Bank of Nigeria, which ruled that provisions of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act, 2011 that were inconsistent with section 192 of the Evidence Act and rule 19(1) of the Rules of Professional Conduct were invalid. The invalid provisions were those that included legal practitioners in the definition of designated non-financial institutions. Such institutions were required, under the Money Laundering Act, to make disclosures to governmental authorities that were capable of requiring legal practitioners to violate confidentiality obligations contained in the Evidence Act and the Rules of Professional Conduct. A further appeal to the Supreme Court has been lodged by the Central Bank of Nigeria.

Attorney-client communications

Elements

Describe the elements necessary to confer protection over attorney-client communications.

The elements required in order to confer protection over attorney-client communications are that a communication has been made by a client to a legal practitioner in the normal course of the legal practitioner’s professional engagement, or advice has been given by a legal practitioner to a client, in the course of, and for the purpose of, the legal practitioner’s professional engagement.

The Legal Practitioners Act defines attorney-client privilege as everything the client told to the attorney or what attorney found out by itself in some other way while representing the client. Consequently, not all attorney-client communication falls under the attorney-client privilege, but only that which has the purpose of representing client’s interests. Attorney-client privilege is also extended to other persons working or who have worked in the attorney’s office. For example, Croatian law does not explicitly provide that certain third parties are not allowed to participate in the communication, or that they are obliged to keep the content learned as confidential, although the Criminal Act provides that non-authorised disclosure of a business secret is a criminal offence. Therefore, other third parties that have participated in the attorney-client communication should keep its content in secrecy. This may also be ensured by execution of a confidentiality agreement or a statement given by such third party.

Exclusions

Describe any settings in which the protections for attorney-client communications are not recognised.

Where litigation is concerned, the Rules of Professional Conduct (2007), the Evidence Act (2011) and the Freedom of Information Act (2011) provide the following settings for which protections for attorney-client communications are not recognised:

  • where the express consent of the client has been obtained;
  • where permitted by law or acting in compliance with a court order;
  • where the acts of the client constitute a crime or fraud or other illegal acts;
  • to establish or collect legal fees;
  • to establish the attorney’s defence (or his or her employees’) against allegations of professional misconduct; and
  • where an application for disclosure of information is made pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (2011) and such information is under the control of a public institution, the court may examine such information and determine that it be disclosed to the court.

During an investigation, the protection for attorney-client communications will not apply where the communication is made in furtherance of any illegal purpose, where the legal practitioner discovers in the course of his or her employment any fact, showing that any crime or fraud has been committed since the commencement of his or her employment or in any of the applicable instances stated above.

The employment considered by the Rules of Professional Conduct (2007) and the Evidence Act (2011) is employment of a legal nature to perform services connected with the practice of law. Therefore, protections for attorney-client communication may not be recognised where a client engages a legal practitioner to provide other services that are not classified as legal services.

Attorney-client privilege applies not just to the period of providing a legal assistance to the client but also afterwards, for as long as its disclosure could cause damage to the client. An attorney not complying with the stated obligation may face a disciplinary proceeding

Who holds the protection?

In your jurisdiction, do the protections for attorney-client communications belong to the client, or is secrecy a duty incumbent on the attorney?

Privileged communication is a benefit that belongs to the client and the client has the right to waive this privilege by consenting to the attorney’s disclosure of attorney-client communication.

In addition, however, confidentiality and non-disclosure are duties imposed on a legal practitioner, who is prohibited from disclosing attorney-client communications or secret and confidential matters without the express consent of the client, save where permitted by law.

Underlying facts in the communication

To what extent are the facts communicated between an attorney and a client protected, as opposed to the attorney-client communication itself?

The Rules of Professional Conduct (2007) make attorney-client communication itself privileged. However, under the Evidence Act, the facts communicated between an attorney and clients are also protected as the provision covers:

the contents or conditions of any document with which he [the attorney] has become acquainted in the course and for the purpose of his professional employment or . . . any advice given by him to his client in the course and for the purpose of such employment.

In order to preserve the client’s secret, the attorney must not disclose any information about the matters entrusted to him or her, even upon the completion of the case.

Agents

In what circumstances do communications with agents of the attorney or agents of the client fall within the scope of the protections for attorney-client communications?

Under rule 19(4) of the Rules of Professional Conduct (2007) and section 193 of the Evidence Act (2011), the duty of confidentiality and non-disclosure is also imposed on agents of the attorney (including ‘his employees, associates and others whose services are utilised by him’) and the attorney is required to exercise reasonable care in ensuring this requirement is not breached by any persons occupying these or similar positions.

Communications with agents of the clients, where such communications are made on behalf of clients, also fall within the scope of protected communications.

As previously stated, attorney-client privilege applies to all persons who have worked or still work at the attorney’s office. Moreover, it is the attorney’s obligation to expressly state in the employment contract that the violation of the attorney-client privilege is a ground for termination of employment. The attorney and his or her employees are obliged to keep all facts related to providing legal assistance to the client as confidential. Even communication that the attorney has with third parties that relates to providing legal assistance to the client is encompassed by the attorney-client privilege. Since protection is awarded not only to information acquired by the attorney directly from the client, but also from other sources, information acquired from others that becomes known to the attorney in the course of rendering any kind of legal assistance to the client would be protected.

Corporations claiming protection

Can a corporation avail itself of the protections for attorney-client communications? Who controls the protections on behalf of the corporation?

The law does not distinguish between individual and corporate clients. As such, it is presumed that the law, as it relates to attorney-client communication, will apply in the same manner to both, provided the attorney has been engaged for purposes of his or her professional employment.

Where a corporation is the client, just like any other client, it can expressly waive the attorney’s duty relating to confidentiality and non-disclosure of attorney-client communication that would otherwise be privileged. This would, ordinarily be done by an employee or agent of the corporation with actual or ostensible authority to act for the corporation in that regard.

Where the duty of confidentiality and non-disclosure is contractual in nature, it is typical for such corporations to indicate who is authorised or permitted to disclose or receive information under the contract. If, for example, a retainer exists between the attorney and the corporation, the retainer may indicate the extent of disclosure that the attorney is authorised to make in respect of the communication with and by the client. Where the agreement is with a third party and the attorney is not specifically authorised to disclose confidential information under same, any communication relating to the contract shall for all intents and purposes remain privileged unless expressly waived by the corporate client.

Where in-house counsel is concerned, they are also considered as acting in the course of their professional employment and as such are bound by the same duty of confidentiality and non-disclosure, which can only be waived by express consent of the client.

Attorney-client privilege applies to individual clients and clients that are legal entities (ie, natural persons and corporations). It is up to the corporation to determine the person in charge of controlling protection for attorney-client communications.

Communications between employees and outside counsel

Do the protections for attorney-client communications extend to communications between employees and outside counsel?

Where the employee is acting for the client, then communications between the employee and outside counsel come within the provisions of the Evidence Act and of the Rules of Professional Conduct.

The protections awarded to attorney-client communications are granted extensively due to the fact that the provisions of the Legal Profession Act, defining the attorney-client privilege, also designate any information the attorney learned in the representation of a client as attorney-client privilege, thus granting it protection. In this regard, communication between employees and outside counsel, if related to the attorney’s representation of the client, would be protected as attorney-client privilege.

Communications between employees and in-house counsel

Do the protections for attorney-client communications extend to communications between employees and in-house counsel?

There is no distinction in Nigeria between in-house counsel and external counsel. The determining factor is whether the communications took place within the context of the seeking, or receipt, of advice in the normal course of the employment of both the employee and the in-house counsel.

Communications between company counsel and ex-employees

To what degree do the protections for attorney-client communications extend to communications between counsel for the company and former employees?

Where the communications occurred within the context of the seeking, or receipt, of advice in the normal course of the employment of counsel for the company, the fact that the employee subsequently ceases to be employed by the company, that fact ought not to affect the protections that initially applied. However, where the communications are between the company’s counsel and an individual no longer in the employment of the company, then unless the former employee’s communication is on behalf of the company, it would appear that the protections do not apply.

The extent of the protections for attorney-client communications will depend on the internal rules and bylaws of the company (those governing the internal sharing of attorney-client communications among its employees) and the stipulations contained in the agreements executed between the client and its employees (a possible confidentiality clause, executed non-disclosure agreement, etc).

Who may waive protection

Who may waive the protections for attorney-client communications?

Waivers can only be granted by the client.

Under the Evidence Act, such waiver has to be by express consent of the client.

The Rules of Professional Conduct state that legal practitioners may reveal or disclose privileged communication ‘with the consent of the client or clients affected’.

A client may waive the protections for attorney-client privilege by giving express and clear consent for disclosure of information, while the attorney may waive the protections for attorney-client privilege in the event such disclosure is necessary for the attorney’s defence or if it is necessary for the justification of the attorney’s decision to withdraw from defending his or her client.

Actions constituting waiver

What actions constitute waiver of the protections for attorney-client communications?

The following actions constitute a waiver:

  • The client expressly authorising the attorney to disclose any communications made to him or her in the course and for the purpose of his or her professional employment.
  • Under the Rules of Professional Conduct, where a client brings a disciplinary action against an attorney, the attorney-client communication protections are waived as the attorney may need to rely on this in his or her defence.
  • The client, through their conduct, could be considered as having waived the protections for attorney-client communications; if, for example, they enter into a contract with a third party where certain matters are disclosed prior to or within the contract or they willingly disclose certain matters on their own to third parties, explicitly through words or in writing or implicitly through their conduct.
  • Where the information is already in the public domain, it will not be considered as privileged communication.

Accidental disclosure

Does accidental disclosure of attorney-client privileged materials waive the privilege?

Accidental disclosure of attorney-client privileged materials by the attorney does not waive the privilege. Such disclosure by an attorney or his or her employees may amount to professional negligence for which the client can bring an action in damages against the attorney. Section 9, Legal Practitioners Act (2004) states that ‘a person shall not be immune from liability for damages attributable to his negligence while acting in his capacity as a legal practitioner’. Where the accidental disclosure is by the client, that would also not waive the privilege as a waiver of a right or privilege must involve a deliberate decision.

Sharing communications among employees

Can attorney-client communications be shared among employees of an entity, without waiving the protections? How?

The privilege that attaches to attorney-client communications, where the client is an entity, is the privilege of that entity. Therefore, it would appear that the sharing, among employees of the entity, of such communications does not remove that privilege as the employees are all, for these purposes, the entity itself. This issue is not one that appears to have received much attention from the courts in Nigeria and, as a result, there is no case law on the point. However, it appears that once attorney-client communications are privileged, if they are shared among employees of an entity, that fact, in and of itself, would not remove the privilege in the absence of an express waiver on the part of the entity.

Exceptions

Describe your jurisdiction’s main exceptions to the protections for attorney-client communications.

Under the Rules of Professional Conduct, the Evidence Act and the Freedom of Information Act, the following exceptions apply:

  • where such communication is made in furtherance of illegal activity;
  • where such communication suggests elements of fraud or crime on the part of the client, while revealing that the same is necessary to prevent this;
  • to establish a defence in a disciplinary action brought by the client, against the attorney or his or her employees (rule 19(3)(d), Rules of Professional Conduct 2007);
  • where such communication is necessary to establish or collect fees from the client (rule 19(3)(d), Rules of Professional Conduct 2007); and
  • where a court finds that the interest of the public in having information disclosed is ‘greater and far more vital’ than protecting the attorney-client communication (section 25(1)(c), Freedom of Information Act 2011).

Litigation proceedings overriding the protection

Can the protections for attorney-client communications be overcome by any criminal or civil proceedings where waiver has not otherwise occurred?

Under rule 19(3)(d) of the Rules of Professional Conduct, an attorney may reveal attorney-client communication ‘when permitted under the rules or required by law or court order’, but is not bound to do so where the client has not waived the privilege.

Where the attorney seeks to establish or collect fees, then he or she is entitled under the Rules of Professional Conduct to disclose privileged material for that purpose.

Where a public institution declines to provide information that is obtainable under the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act, a court is required, where it makes a finding that the interest of the public in having the record being made available is greater and more vital than the interest being served if the application is denied, to order that such information be disclosed.

Recognition of foreign protections

In what circumstances are foreign protections for attorney-client communications recognised in your jurisdiction?

It does not appear that foreign protections for attorney-client communications can be recognised in Nigeria under either the Rules of Professional Conduct or the Evidence Act. This is because the terms ‘lawyer’, as used in the Rules of Professional Conduct, and ‘legal practitioner’, as used in the Evidence Act, limit such persons to persons whose names are entered in the ‘roll’ (see question 2). Therefore, only communications between such persons and their clients are afforded protection under the legislation and the rules.

 

Best practice to maintain protection

Describe the best practices in your jurisdiction that aim to ensure that protections for attorney-client communications are maintained.

First, circulation of attorney-client communications should be restricted to the client and its employees. Written communications containing material in which privilege is claimed should be marked ‘privileged and confidential’ or ‘communication for the sole purpose of providing legal advice’. Analysis or discussion of legal advice in written memoranda, minutes of meetings or in any other documents should be avoided as much as possible. Where legal advice must be discussed internally, notes or minutes of legal issues and their consequences should be made and kept separate from notes and minutes recording other issues.

 

Work product

Elements

Describe the elements necessary to confer protection over work product.

Under the Evidence Act (2011), the material must have been communicated or disclosed to the attorney ‘in the course and for the purpose of his professional employment’.

In addition, under the Rules of Professional Conduct, all oral and written communication between the attorney and his or her client, in the course of professional employment, are privileged.

Consequently, any material communicated to the attorney in the course of his engagement by the client, for the specific purpose of such engagement is afforded protection.

Exclusions

Describe any settings in which the protections for work product are not recognised.

Work product is limited to oral and written communication from the client to the attorney (and vice versa) in the course of normal professional employment, and includes documentation and advice. Any communication outside the course of professional employment and the practice of law, as stipulated under the Legal Practitioner’s Act (2004) is unlikely to be regarded as work product.

Who holds the protection

Who holds the protections for work product?

The protection belongs, primarily, to the client. However, the attorney may also choose to rely on this protection when he or she is required to disclose information that may result in a breach of the duty of confidentiality and non-disclosure to the client.

Types of work product

Is greater protection given to certain types of work product?

All forms of protected attorney-client communication receive the same level of protection and the types of divisions that exist in other jurisdictions have yet to be recognised in Nigeria. It is conceivable that if the courts in Nigeria are required to consider the protection afforded to attorney-client communication under English common law, then there might be explicit recognition given to such divisions.

In-house counsel work product

Is work product created by, or at the direction of, in-house counsel protected?

In-house counsel are bound by the Rules of Professional Conduct (2007) and the Evidence Act (2011) in the performance of their duties. As such, any work product created by, or in which they become acquainted, in the course of their professional employment will amount to attorney-client communication and the client (company) will be protected.

Work product of agents

In what circumstances do materials created by others, at the direction of an attorney or at the direction of a client, fall within the scope of the protections for work product?

The law does not appear to regulate work product that is outside the control of the attorney. However, where the attorney specifically requires or utilises the services of employees, associates and others in the course of his or her professional employment, he or she is expected to exercise reasonable care in ensuring that these persons are bound by the same duty of confidentiality and non-disclosure (rule 19(4), Rules of Professional Conduct 2007). These will therefore amount to privileged communication.

Third parties overcoming the protection

Can a third party overcome the protections for work product? How?

Yes. This is possible when the client waives this protection.

It is also possible when a third party can establish that a crime, fraud or other illegality would be committed by not disclosing the information. Under the Freedom of Information Act, third parties can also apply to the court for an order to disclose information that has been denied on the ground of attorney-client privileged communication.

Who may waive work-product protection

Who may waive the protections for work product?

The protection belongs to the client and can, therefore, only be waived by the client.

Actions constituting waiver

What actions constitute waiver of the protections for work product?

The following constitute waiver:

  • express (or implied) consent of the client;
  • implied conduct of the client; and
  • where the attorney is required to reveal work product to establish a defence in his or her employees’ favour in a disciplinary action brought by the client.

Client access to attorney files

May clients demand their attorney’s files relating to their representation? Does that waive the protections for work product?

In the event that a client demands, and obtains, the files relating to its case, then, while the attorney remains bound to maintain the obligation to keep protected material confidential, in the absence of express waiver by the client, the protections remain in place.

Accidental disclosure of work product

Does accidental disclosure of work-product protected materials waive the protection?

Work product between a client and his attorney is privileged and inadvertent disclosure cannot waive this protection. Accidental disclosure is therefore not excused and will, at the very least, amount to professional negligence for which the client can bring an action for damages against the attorney. Section 9, Legal Practitioners Act (2004)states that ‘a person shall not be immune from liability for damages attributable to his negligence while acting in his capacity as a legal practitioner’.

Where there is an express confidentiality agreement with the client, the client can also sue the attorney for breach of contract or negligence or both.

Exceptions

Describe your jurisdiction’s main exceptions to the protections for work product.

The main exceptions are as follows:

  • where such communication is made in furtherance of illegal activity;
  • where such communication suggests elements of fraud or crime on the part of the client, and revealing it is necessary to prevent this;
  • to establish a defence in a disciplinary action brought by the client, against the attorney or his or her employees;
  • where such communication is necessary to establish or collect fees from the client; and
  • where a court finds that the interest of the public in having information disclosed is ‘greater and far more vital’ than protecting the attorney-client communication (section 25(1)(c), Freedom of Information Act 2011).

Litigation proceedings overriding the protections

Can the protections for work product be overcome by any criminal or civil proceedings where waiver has not otherwise occurred?

Protections may be overcome where the need to protect the client is outweighed by the public interest in the proper administration of justice. Also, if there is a court order to this effect, the attorney who is considered an officer of the court is bound by the court order and will be held in contempt of court for failure to comply with same.

Recognition of foreign protection

In what circumstances are foreign protections for work product recognised in your jurisdiction?

Nigeria does not distinguish between different forms of protected material. However, and as stated in question 20, foreign protections are not recognised in Nigeria. Foreign work product will only be protected in Nigeria where such work product qualifies for protection under Nigerian laws and regulations.

Other issues

Who determines what is protected

Who determines whether attorney-client communications or work product are protected from disclosure?

Ultimately, such determination would be made by a court. In the first instance, the client or the attorney would claim the protection. Where there is a dispute as to whether the communications or work product are protected, the decision as to whether or not this is indeed the case would be for a court.

Common interest

Can attorney-client communications or work product be shared among clients with a common interest who are represented by separate attorneys, without waiving the protections? How may the protections be preserved or waived?

The Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners and the Evidence Act are the only statutory sources that provide protections against disclosure for attorney-client communications or work product. However, common law principles that afford protection to, for example, communications made after litigation has started or is ‘reasonably in prospect’, may provide additional protection in Nigeria. In such an event, communication and material between a lawyer and a client, a lawyer and an agent (whether or not that agent is a lawyer), or a lawyer and a third party, for the sole or dominant purpose of litigation, whether for seeking or giving advice in relation to it, or for obtaining evidence to be used in it, or for obtaining information leading to obtaining such evidence may be afforded protection under such common law principles, in addition to the protections afforded under the Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners and the Evidence Act.

While the test as to whether particular communications and work product are privileged will be very much determined by the relevant facts, there may be some advantages in taking the following steps: restricting the circulation of legal advice and legal communications to the client and its employees only, and labelling ‘privileged and confidential’ or ‘communication for the sole purpose of providing legal advice’. Although this is not conclusive in terms of establishing privilege, it can be helpful in doing so. It should also make it clearer to recipients that the relevant document is privileged and should therefore not be shared or re-sent.

Limited waiver

Can attorney-client communications or work product be disclosed to government authorities without waiving the protections? How?

Yes. Where a court order exists compelling the attorney to disclose certain communication, this will be an exception to the requirement for a waiver by the client prior to making such disclosure.

In addition, there may be other circumstances where the law permits disclosure without the consent or waiver of the client, for example, for the proper administration of justice or in the greater interest of the general public - section 25(1)(c), Freedom of Information Act 2011.

Under the Freedom of Information Act, a court may require a public authority to disclose information that would typically be exempted from disclosure, including attorney-client communication, where it finds that the basis for non-disclosure is unreasonable or such public authority has acted outside its authority.

Other privileges or protections

Are there other recognised privileges or protections in your jurisdiction that permit attorneys and clients to maintain the confidentiality of communications or work product?

It is possible that, besides the privileges and protections created by and contained in the Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners and section 192 of the Evidence Act, the common law principles laid down by English courts in cases such as Regina v Special Commissioner and Another, Ex P Morgan Grenfell & Co Ltd may be applied in Nigeria. These principles do not appear to have been considered by the courts in Nigeria.