Case Law Review: Senator Bello Yaki & Anor V. Senator Atiku Bagudu & Ors.
On November 13, 2015, the Supreme Court of Nigeria delivered its judgment in the case of
(2015) LPELR-25721 (SC). Whilst the case was an appeal arising out of an election petition, the apex court’s decision on the aspects of the law relating to the sealing and stamping of documents by legal practitioners is very instructive. Since the judgment, Courts have begun enforcing the rule as it relates to sealing and stamping, albeit in varying degrees.
This review is restricted only to the part of the judgment relating to the sealing and stamping of documents by legal practitioners.
The (the LPA) lays the foundation for the stamping and sealing of documents by legal practitioners. Firstly, the LPA makes provisions for the practice of law in Nigeria. Particularly, it should be noted that the qualification to practice law as a legal practitioner is as provided under the LPA, which includes being called to the Bar and enrolled at the Supreme Court of Nigeria as a legal practitioner. It is that qualification that forms the basis of a legal practitioner signing legal documents i.e. that the legal practitioner has the authority to do so by virtue of his being enrolled as a member of the Nigerian Bar.
The Supreme Court in the Yaki’s case clearly states that it is being enrolled as a legal practitioner pursuant to the LPA that entitles a legal practitioner to sign/frank any legal document either for filing in a court of law in a proceeding or otherwise. This same point was made by the apex court in the case of
(2007) 10 NWLR (Pt.1043) 521.
The the RPC) was made by the General Council of the Bar pursuant to the LPA. The RPC contains further and specific rules made to guide and regulate the conduct of the legal practitioner.
Particularly, Rule 10 (1), (2) and (3) thereof provide for the sealing and stamping of legal documents by the lawyer and legal practitioner.
Rule 10 (1) provides that: The above represents the position of the law as stated in the RPC. However, whilst the LPA has existed since 1990 and with a subsequent amendment in 2004, and the RPC has existed since 2007, the entire legal profession and all its constituents ranging from lawyers to judges paid absolutely no attention to the above stated provisions requiring legal documents to be sealed and stamped. Furthermore, there is little evidence that the courts made any attempt to enforce the provisions of the LPA and RPC in this regard.
The turning point came in November 2015 when the Supreme Court decided the Yaki’s case and since then, the Courts have begun to enforce the provisions of the RPC. This case marks a watershed event in the practice of law in Nigeria, as all legal documents have come to require sealing and stamping as envisaged by the RPC.
Firstly, the simple and clear position of the law as enunciated in this case is that:
The Supreme Court further stated that all legal documents shall be sealed and stamped by the legal practitioner as envisaged by the RPC. However, the apex Court further held that the provisions of the RPC are not a substitute for the substantive law on the matter that is why non-compliance thereto renders the document concerned voidable and not void or a nullity.
In the words of Walter Onnoghen, JSC:
If documents which are not sealed and stamped by the Legal Practitioner are not void but only voidable, what then is the aim of sealing and stamping under the RPC?
According to the apex Court, the provision of the RPC is directed at the legal practitioner to provide evidence of his qualification to practice law in Nigeria in addition to his name being on the Roll at the Supreme Court of Nigeria. It therefore saves time needed for a search at the Supreme Court to determine the authenticity of the claim of the legal practitioner for being so qualified. This is particularly important in verifying the authenticity of a legal practitioner when so acting, with a view to stopping as much as possible the practice of law by persons not so entitled.
The Supreme Court in the same Yaki’s case held that failure to affix the Nigerian Bar Association stamp and/or seal cannot invalidate processes filed in court or legal documents, it only makes the documents voidable. That is to say that such documents are deemed not to have been properly signed and not that they are invalid. Such documents are redeemed and made valid by a simple directive by the Judge or the relevant authority at the time of filing the voidable document for erring counsel to affix stamp and seal as provided for in Rule 10 of RPC.
In the case under review, the Court further held that the process filed in breach of Rule 10 (1) of the RPC can be saved and its signing and filing regularised by affixing the approved seal and stamp on it. It is a legal document improperly filed and the fixing of the seal and stamp would make the filing proper in law. The Court held that where it is not done, the court cannot take cognizance of a document not properly filed and the filing not regularized.
For emphasis and at the risk of repetition, all legal documents must be sealed and stamped by the legal practitioner. According to Rule 10 (2) of the RPC, “legal documents” shall include: a) pleadings; b affidavits; c) depositions; d) applications; e) instruments; f) agreements; g) deeds; h) letters; i) memoranda; j) report; k) legal opinions; or l) any similar document
In deciding the appeal, the Court finalised as follows: Firstly, that all processes and documents which are not sealed and/or stamped by the Legal Practitioner would not be incompetent, as it has to do with proper authentication.
Secondly, the refusal of the document by the registry is a sanction itself pending proper signature and affixing of stamp/seal as required by the RPC.
Thirdly, the breach of the rule should not be viewed as a substantive infraction but a mere irregularity which can be remedied, failing which the document will not be countenanced as a proper and regular document.
In practice, courts now enforce this decision as legal documents which do not bear the NBA’s seal of the legal practitioner who prepared them are liable to be discountenanced until they are regularized by affixing the aforementioned seal.
In light of the foregoing, the NBA has made seals for all legal practitioners in the following categories – Law Practice, Government & Public Service and Private Sector. It has therefore become imperative for all legal practitioners, irrespective of their categories, to authenticate every legal document produced by them by affixing the NBA seal.