There is a class action and collective redress mechanism in Nigeria. A class action is a legal mechanism which empowers the court to appoint one or more persons to represent a person, class or members of the class in enforcing a cause of action before the court. A claimant may commence a suit as a class action, or a defendant may be sued as representing a class or members of a class.

To commence a class action, a party will require an order of court permitting the party to represent the class or members of the class. The court order is usually described as notice of appointment. The notice of appointment is binding on all members of the class. There are factors that a court will consider in granting an application to commence a class action. The party or Applicant must satisfy the court that members of the class are numerous and cannot be readily ascertained or if ascertained, cannot be found. The cause of action must also fall within the scope of matters that may be commenced as class action under the various civil procedural rules of the High Courts in Nigeria.

Generally, class action may be commenced with respect to actions relating to intellectual property rights, interpretation of written instruments, statutes, administration of estates, property subject to trust and land held under customary law as family or community property.

There are no laws on class action in Nigeria. The principal legal regulations for class action in Nigeria are the various civil procedure rules of the High Courts in Nigeria.

Judicial decisions also provide legal framework for class actions in Nigeria. There are a few judicial decisions on class action in Nigeria including the cases of Abraham Adesanya v. President of Federal Republic of Nigeria (1981) LPELR-147(SC), Gallaher Ltd. v. B.A.T. (Nig) Ltd (2015) 13 NWLR (Pt. 1476) 325 and Babalola v. Apple Inc. (2021) 15 NWLR (Pt.1799) 193.

The right to commence a class action is regulated by the civil procedure rules and judicial decisions relating to class action. The civil procedure rules specify the requirements for commencement of class action. Order 9 Rule 4(1) of the Federal High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2019 (“FHC Rules”) restricts the commencement of class action to matters relating to trademarks, copyright or patent and designs. By the provision of Order 15 Rule 13 of the High Court of Lagos State (Civil Procedure) Rules 2019 (the “HCL Rules”), class action may be commenced with respect to actions relating to interpretation of written instruments, statutes, administration of estates, property subject to trust and land held under customary law as family or community property. Non-compliance with the requirements of the rules on class action will defeat the action.

Class action suits primarily serve to improve access to justice, particularly for individuals who may lack the financial means to pursue legal action on their own. They also promote greater accountability among corporations and government bodies, as the risk of collective liability incentivizes legal compliance. Nevertheless, many potential claimants either remain unaware of their rights or are financially unable to initiate such proceedings.

Class action is still evolving in Nigeria. There are few cases and decisions of courts on class actions. This is partly due to the restrictive nature of the matters that can be commenced as class action under the civil procedure rules.

The history of class actions in Nigeria is founded on the provisions on class action in the civil procedure rules of the High Courts. The option of class action has always existed in the civil procedure rules of the High Courts. For instance, class action was included in the provisions of Order 13 Rule 15 of the High Court of Lagos State (Civil Procedure) Rules 1972 and the provision relating to class action has been consistently retained in subsequent rules of the High Court of Lagos State. The High Court Rules of other states in Nigeria also have similar provisions on class action.

Additionally, the civil procedure rules of the Federal High Court and National Industrial Court of Nigeria also contain provisions relating to class actions. The history of class action at the Federal High Court began with the enactment of the Federal High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules 2009 which specifically provided for class actions with respect to intellectual property rights cases. This provision has also been retained in Order 9 Rule 4 of the FHC Rules which is the extant rules of the court. Order 13 Rule 11(5) of the National Industrial Court (Civil Procedure) Rules 2017 (the “NIC Rules”) provides for class action in matters relating to application for declaration or an injunction.

The main policy basis for class action in Nigeria are expressed in the provisions relating to class action in the civil procedure rules and judicial decisions. Essentially, class action prevents multiplicity of suits in respect of the same or similar cause of action. It may be impossible or impracticable to join or name all persons likely to be affected by a cause of action as parties to an action to enforce the cause of action. Class action therefore provides a means to protect the interest of members of a class who may not be able to sue to enforce their rights.

The courts in Nigeria have also articulated the principal policy basis for class action. In the case of Babalola v. Apple Inc. (supra) at page 211, the Court of Appeal held that the need for class action arises where individual suits would be impracticable.

Class actions remain relatively rare in Nigeria, both in terms of frequency and scope. While provisions for class actions exist in various court rules, their practical application has been limited. This will also likely be because of the restrictions on its applicability to only some type of claims under the different Rules.

In terms of number of decided and reported cases, there are a limited number of reported cases on class action in comparison with other types of litigation.

However, as earlier mentioned, there are recent developments that suggest that class action claims are now becoming more prevalent in Nigeria. Just recently, there have been class action suits in the banking sectors where we have customers suing reputable banks for themselves and on behalf of millions of other customers affected by the actions of these banks like breach of data and negligence. There is a growing interest in class actions, particularly in areas such as consumer protection, employment actions, environmental law, and corporate accountability. As awareness increases and the legal framework evolves, class actions may become a more prominent feature of Nigerian litigation.

The types of claims that may be commenced by class action are specified in the various court rules. Class actions are most prevalent in claims relating to trademark infringements, consumer protection claims and data protection at the Federal High Court.

The courts in Nigeria have relied on the definition of class action in the Black’s Law Dictionary. In the case of Babalola v. Apple Inc. (supra) at pages 210-211, the Court of Appeal in Nigeria defined class action as follows:

“According to Black’s Law Dictionary, Eighth Edition, page 267, a class action is defined as ‘A lawsuit in which the Court authorizes a single person or a small group of people to represent the interests of a larger group, specifically a lawsuit in which the convenience either of the public or of the interested parties requires that the case be settled through litigation by or against only a part of the group of similarly situated 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 personally or through a personally selected representative, or through a person specially appointed to act as a trustee.”

In Nigeria, the initiation of a class action or collective redress proceeding is typically triggered when a particular event or pattern of conduct impacts a large group of people in a similar manner, resulting in a shared grievance. These triggers span various sectors and legal issues, but they all share the common element of harm or injury suffered collectively, rather than individually.

An example is the case of Gallaher Ltd. v. B.A.T. (Nig) Ltd (supra) where the Defendants were sued as representing all members of the class, “engaged in the trade or business of manufacturing/supplying/importing, selling and/or assisting in selling, infringing/passing off or causing and enabling others to infringe/pass off and/or offering and distributing for sale “Gold Bond” brand of cigarette…”. The members of the class in this case cannot be readily ascertained or found.

Regulatory enforcement findings can trigger class actions and collective litigation. For instance, if a regulatory breach is publicized, like a data breach or anti-competitive practices, affecting a large number of people, this awareness can lead to the affected members coming together to institute a collective redress proceeding.

In the financial and banking sector, acts of negligence or breaches of the duty of care can trigger violations across multiple regulatory bodies, such as the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC), the National Information Technology Development Agency (NITDA), and the Nigeria Data Protection Commission (NDPC). When such widespread breaches are uncovered and publicly addressed by these regulators, it can raise public awareness and potentially prompt a collective redress action. This is because the harm affects a broad group of consumers, not just one individual, making it a shared grievance. Moreover, since penalties or enforcement outcomes from these agencies are typically directed to the government and not directly to affected consumers, those seeking personal compensation or remedy are more likely to pursue a class action to enforce their rights.

Additionally, regulatory enforcement findings may serve as evidence during the course of the proceedings.

Based on the provisions of the various civil procedure rules in Nigeria, the causes of action that can give rise to a class action include actions relating to intellectual property rights, interpretation of written instruments or statutes, administration of estates, property subject to trust and land held under customary law as family or community property. These types of causes of action may be premised on different statutory provisions relating to the following:

• Consumer Protection
• Environmental Pollution
• Employment-Related
• Data Protection and Digital Rights
• Financial and Investment Fraud

Yes, there are limitations to types of claims that can be brought on a collective basis. These limitations arise mainly from the civil procedural rules regulating class action.

Generally, a party who has experienced the same or similar harm as other class members, may be appointed to represent the class or members of the class in a class action. The definition of party includes natural or artificial persons. The main test for determining capacity to bring class action is that the claim or defence of the named party must adequately protect the interest of the class.

There are no express limits on the nationality or domicile of persons who may act as claimants in a class action in Nigeria. The provisions of the civil procedure rules on domicile of parties are only applicable to defendants sued as representatives of members of a class. The rules require that actions generally (inclusive of class actions) should be instituted where the defendant resides or carries on business, or the place where the cause of action arose.

The civil procedure rules of the various High Courts, Federal High Court and National Industrial Court of Nigeria do not place any limits on size or type of class. The qualifications in the rules in relation to a class are as follows:

• The class or some members of the class cannot be ascertained;
• The class or some members of the class if ascertained, cannot be found; or
• The class and members cannot be ascertained and be found.

By the above, it is apparent that there is no limitations on the size or type of class.

There is no prohibition in sourcing members of any class. The only requirement is that the members must share common interest in the dispute. The legal or factual question to be determined in the class action must be common to the members of the class.

Class actions may be filed in the High Courts of the States, the Federal High Court, or the National Industrial Court of Nigeria, depending on the subject matter of the claim. It is imperative to mention that these Courts have coordinate jurisdiction.

Class action must be commenced in accordance with the provisions of the rules of court regulating class actions. A class action can only be commenced pursuant to the leave of court. This is a condition precedent for the commencement of class action in Nigeria. The cause of action in the class action must fall within the scope of actions that can give rise to a class action under the rules of court. Non-compliance with the rules may render the class action incompetent and the suit struck out for lack of jurisdiction.

There are other general statutory and procedural requirements that regulate commencement of any type of action in any High Court in Nigeria. A party must consider the court with the jurisdiction to entertain the cause of action in the class action.

The FHC Rules adopts an “opt in” or “opt out” mechanism. Order 9 Rule 4(3) of the FHC Rules provides that a person or class or member of the class may apply to the court or a judge in chambers to opt in or opt out of the class and the court or judge in chambers may, on good and justifiable cause, permit such person or class or members of the class represented in a class action to opt in or opt out of the class action.

The application to the judge is by a motion ex parte and the affidavit in support of the application must provide good and justifiable reason for the application.

To start a class action, a claimant is required to apply to the court for an order to be appointed to represent the class interested or members of the class. The application is typically done through a motion ex parte, seeking permission for the named claimant(s) to represent a class or members of the class. Upon hearing the application, the judge may appoint one or more representatives to act on behalf of the class. Once leave is granted, the action proceeds under the general civil procedure.

The application for appointment as representative of the class must be accompanied with the originating processes to be filed in the substantive suit.

Apart from the procedure in Question 17 above, no other mandatory procedural requirements apply specifically to class actions. The general civil procedure rules of the relevant courts where the action is instituted continue to apply throughout the proceedings.

Normal civil procedure rules are applicable to class action. There are no special set of rules for the class action. It is the civil procedure rules that regulate class actions.

A class action may run for 18 to 36 months from the date of commencement. The factors responsible for the length of time include availability of the court, interlocutory applications and appeals from interlocutory decisions.

There are different reliefs available to a claimant in a class action or collective redress proceedings. The remedies available are:

1. Declaratory Relief: A declaratory relief is one that seeks the pronouncement of the court on the legal rights or obligations of the parties. This remedy affirms a party’s legal right or clarifies the state of affairs or legal position of parties without making any specific orders for enforcement.
2. Injunctive Relief: This remedy is granted to stop, restrain or restrict a party from doing an act that infringes the rights of another party. There are different types of injunctions that may be granted by the court including mandatory injunction, prohibitive injunction and perpetual injunction.
3. Damages: These are monetary compensation awarded in favour of a successful claimant. A claimant in a class action is entitled to seek monetary damages for any injury or loss suffered as a result of the legal wrong alleged in the class action. Damages may be in the form of special or general damages. Special damages is granted to compensate the claimant for the actual loss suffered by the claimant as established by the evidence presented in the claim. General damages are discretionary and flow from the actions of the defendants in the claim.

Yes, punitive or exemplary damages are available in class actions.

Cases at the High Courts in Nigeria are determined by a judge. Generally, the High Court is duly constituted with one judge; the Court of Appeal with a panel of at least three justices or a maximum of five justices; and the Supreme Court with at least five justices, or a maximum of seven justices for certain constitutional matters.

In Nigeria, courts do not use juries. They operate under a bench trial system where one or more judges preside over the case and deliver a verdict. Consequently, the outcome is determined by judges rather than a jury of citizens.

The measure of damages in class actions or collective redress proceedings is the same as the rule applicable in other civil claims. The general rule as to the measure of damages is that damages would be awarded to put the claimant in the same position as he would have been in, had the injury or wrong not occurred. Award of damages is not to enrich the claimant but to compensate the claimant for the loss suffered.

The main difference in the award of damages in class actions is that the measure of damages is based on the class or members of class and not the named claimant in the suit.

There is a mechanism for collective settlement of class actions under the various High Court rules in Nigeria. The mechanisms are, however, not exclusive to class actions or collective redress proceedings. The civil procedure rules provide for Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) which is known as out of court settlement, using the different forms of dispute resolution like arbitration and conciliation/ mediation.

For instance, under the HCL Rules, , the registry of Court has the powers to screen matters it deems suitable for alternative dispute resolution (“ADR”) and accordingly refer the parties to ADR. Such action will not proceed for adjudication by the court until it is certain that parties are unable to settle the dispute through ADR. Also, in the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (Civil Procedure) Rules 2025 (the “FCT Rules”), Order 17 provides for ADR, while Order 52 deals with Arbitration.

Under the HCL Rules, and High Court of Lagos State (Expeditious Disposal of Civil Cases) Practice Direction (No 2) of 2019 on Pre-action Protocols require parties to:

• exchange sufficient information;
• attempt to settle the issues without litigation;
• consider ADR to facilitate settlement and reduce costs; and
• treat litigation as a last resort.

Similarly, Order 5 Rule 8 of the HCL Rules mandates that upon the filing of originating processes, the registry of the court shall screen the processes for suitability for ADR and where it is considered appropriate, the chief judge may refer the case to the Lagos Multi-Door Courthouse or other appropriate ADR institutions or practitioners.

The rules have led to the provision for references to ADR, which creates the use of the mechanism of mediation, arbitration or conciliation to emerge from a court reference in settling a class action/collective redress proceeding. This is separate from the class action arbitration occurring voluntarily between the plaintiffs and the defendant(s).

Furthermore, Class arbitration is an alternative to a class action lawsuit in which a group of plaintiffs settle its differences with a defendant in the form of arbitration; it enables plaintiffs to recover for damages they incur without the need for a case to go to court. However, in arbitral proceedings, the agreement to arbitrate, which can be embedded in a contract or exist as a separate clause, is vital. This prerequisite may restrict the use of the arbitration mechanism for class action, as it requires the consent of all parties to proceed.

Generally, Nigeria Court system encourages parties to explore settlement mechanism in settling disputes, including class actions.

The courts provide judicial oversight for settlements during the proceedings before the court. In a class action, judicial oversight is necessary to ensure that the members of the class who are not named as parties in the action are protected in settlement discussion.

Under the HCLRules and the National Industrial Court of Nigeria Rules, there is a provision for the power of the Court to approve compromise. Order 15 Rule 14 of the HCL Rules provide as follows:

Where in any proceeding mentioned in Rule 13(1) of this Order, compromise is proposed and the persons interested in or may be affected by the compromise (including unborn or unascertained persons) are absent or not parties to the proceedings but:

(a) there are some other persons having the same interest before the Court who assent to the compromise or on whose behalf the Court sanctions the compromise; or

(b) the absent persons are represented by a person under Rule 13 of this Order who so assents.

A Judge may if satisfied that it is expedient and in the interest of absent persons approve the compromise and order that such compromise shall be binding.

The above provision shows that in settlement/compromise discussions, the Court, by virtue of its power to approve such compromise, ensures that such a compromise is not only to the benefit of representatives but also for the interest of all members of the class. It is important to note that this provision is not present in some Rules of Court for various states, for instance, the FHC Rules do not make provision for power to approve compromise.

In addition to the specific provision relating to settlement in class actions, there are general provisions which allow all courts in exercise of its duty to promote and encourage amicable settlement of claims to refer/order parties to explore settlement using any of the ADR mechanisms. In such situation, that is court ordered settlement, parties have a responsibility of reporting to the Court and providing update on the progress of the settlement discussion. Once settlement is agreed, the terms of settlement are drawn up and filed in the court, which the Court adopts as consent judgment in the class action. By this, the Court is able to oversee and monitor the settlement discussions.

The top three emerging business risks in Nigeria with respect to class actions are cyber security risks, data privacy violations, and AI related risks. These areas are still evolving in Nigeria and are wide-ranging. These risks also affect a large population of Nigerians.

Class action in Nigeria is a growing trend. The development of class action in Nigeria has been slow if not stagnant. The concept of class actions does not have significant widespread in Nigeria unlike other countries such as the United States of America. In America, there are statutory provisions on class action like the Class Action Fairness Act. In Nigeria, there is no legislation or law on class actions.

Judicial decisions on class action are also few and there is no recent significant judicial decision or trends in litigation relating to class actions in the last three years in Nigeria. Most of the landmark cases on class actions in Nigeria were decided more than three years ago and even the decisions in the cases where on procedural matters and not the substantive claim in the class actions.

The civil procedure rules of courts have remained the main sources of authority for class action in Nigeria. The provisions of the rules are not adequate for class action litigation as they do not address the peculiar nature of class action. The rules only address the means for commencement of class action without any specific provision on the conduct of the substantive class action.

We anticipate that any significant legal development in respect of collective redress and class actions in Nigeria may be in the area of data protection rights. There is a growing awareness amongst Nigerians on data privacy rights and there are more civil society organisations advocating for data protection measures in Nigeria.

N/A

There are no legislative proposals for the reforms of class actions in Nigeria. We however believe that there is a need for legislative reforms on class actions. The scope of matters that can give rise to class action ought to be expanded to include actions relating to enforcements of fundamental rights, consumer protection, and data protection in Nigeria.