Expert Witnesses in Nigerian ADR and Litigation: Practical Uses, Importance, and the Case for Greater Adoption

In modern dispute resolution, whether before the courts or within alternative dispute resolution (ADR) mechanisms such as arbitration and mediation, expert witnesses play a critical role in assisting decision-makers to understand complex, technical, scientific, or specialised issues that lie beyond ordinary legal or judicial knowledge. As disputes increasingly involve sophisticated commercial transactions, emerging technologies, financial instruments, engineering processes, and specialised industry practices, the relevance of expert evidence has become more pronounced.

In Nigeria, the use of expert witnesses in both litigation and ADR is steadily growing; however, it remains underutilised when compared with global best practices. International experience demonstrates a far greater reliance on expert input, particularly in arbitration involving technical, construction, energy, finance, and intellectual property disputes. Empirical data support this trend. A 2022 survey conducted by Queen Mary University of London revealed that 76% of respondents in international arbitration considered technical expertise, including expert evidence, to be critically important in the resolution of complex disputes. This underscores the central role experts now play in shaping arbitral outcomes.

At the same time, global surveys have highlighted legitimate concerns regarding the credibility and independence of expert witnesses. A 2021 BCLP survey reported that 51% of practitioners perceived party-appointed experts as resembling “hired guns,” raising questions about impartiality and the quality of expert testimony. Similarly, historical data from a 2012 survey indicated that approximately 90% of expert witnesses in international arbitration were party-appointed, yet fewer than half of respondents believed such experts were more effective than independent or tribunal-appointed experts. These findings illustrate that while expert evidence is indispensable, its persuasive value depends heavily on neutrality, methodological rigour, and transparency.

Against this backdrop, Nigeria stands at an important crossroads. As commercial disputes become more complex and ADR gains wider acceptance, there is a compelling case for the more strategic, structured, and credible use of expert witnesses in both litigation and ADR proceedings. Doing so would not only enhance the quality of decision-making but also align Nigerian dispute resolution practice more closely with international standards.

1. Who Is an Expert Witness?

Under Nigerian law, an expert witness is “any person who is specially skilled in the field in which they are giving evidence,” such that their knowledge, skill, training, or experience assists the tribunal in understanding an issue beyond the ordinary knowledge of the judge or arbitrator.

Section 68 of the Evidence Act 2011 provides that expert opinion is admissible where the court must form an opinion on points such as science, art, foreign law, custom, or handwriting.

2. Expert Witnesses in Litigation

2.1 When Are Experts Used?

In litigation, expert testimony becomes critical when technical questions arise that judges cannot reliably decide without specialised input. Common fields include:

1. Medical standards in negligence claims;
2. Forensic accounting in financial and fraud disputes;
3. Engineering in construction and accident cases; and
4. Customary law or foreign law matters.

In medical malpractice cases, courts routinely consider expert evidence to determine standards of care and causation between professional conduct and harm.

2.2 Legal Standards and Requirements

Nigerian courts have held that experts must be qualified in their field, present scientific or technical analysis, and aid the fact‑finder in understanding complex issues. The court retains the discretion to accept or reject expert evidence based on credibility and relevance.

For example, in Omisore v. Aregbesola (2015) LPELR – 24803 (SC) at page 111E – F., the Supreme Court emphasised that a witness must genuinely have the expertise claimed or their testimony will be disregarded.  The apex court has, in a long line of authorities, articulated the conditions under which expert evidence may be admitted and relied upon. In Sowemimo & Anor v. The State (2004) LPELR-3108 (SC) at 18C–D, the Supreme Court approvingly restated the principle in Wambai v. Kano Native Authority (1965) NMLR 15 as follows:

“In certain cases, evidence of opinion of an expert is relevant, but he must be called as a witness and must state his qualifications and satisfy the Court that he is an expert on the subject in which he is to give his opinion and he must state clearly the reasons for his opinion.”

Similarly, the Court of Appeal has maintained a strict approach to the admissibility of expert reports. In Jalbait Ventures (Nig) Ltd & Anor v. Unity Bank Plc (2016) LPELR-41625 (CA) at 33–34A–C, per Wambai, JCA, the Court held that:

“It is now settled law that for an expert report to be admissible and relied upon, the expert must be called as a witness, more so where the report is of a scientific or technical nature which may be outside the knowledge of the Judge… The party seeking to rely on such a report has an obligation to call the expert as a witness to subject him to cross-examination not only on the contents of the report but also on his acclaimed qualification… The reasons for his opinion must also be scrutinized.”

The Court relied on, among others, Kayode Ventures v. Minister, FCT (2010) 7 NWLR (Pt. 1192) 171 (SC); A.G.F. v. Alhaji Atiku Abubakar & Ors (2002) 4 SCNJ 456; Ogiale v. SPDC (Nig.) Ltd (1997) NWLR (Pt. 480) 148; and Stoyol & Anor v. INEC (2011) LPELR (CA).

3. Expert Witnesses in ADR (Arbitration and Mediation)

3.1 Arbitration

Arbitration is increasingly the forum of choice for commercial disputes in Nigeria. The Arbitration and Mediation Act recognises that arbitrators may consider expert evidence where technical issues arise, similar to litigation, even if formal evidence rules are relaxed.

In international or commercial arbitration involving specialised issues (e.g., oil & gas valuation, construction defects, intellectual property valuation), expert reports and testimony are often determinative of key issues.

3.2 Mediation and Expert Participation

In mediation, expert input can help parties evaluate risks, quantify damages or losses, and facilitate settlement by providing clear, objective data that narrows the dispute especially where technical or financial issues are central.

4. Why Expert Witnesses Matter (with Statistics & Case Examples)

4.1 Clarifying Complex Evidence

Evidence of experts simplifies complex information for judges and arbitrators, making decision‑making fairer and more informed. Forensic accounting experts, for instance, played a significant role in investigative proceedings that exposed complex financial fraud in high‑profile Nigerian corruption cases such as James Ibori, Diezani Alison‑Madueke, and Darius Ishaku. In these matters, forensic experts helped trace and value assets and transactions that ordinary fact‑finders could not decipher alone.

4.2 Supporting Credibility and Reliability

Expert evidence often spells the difference between success and failure in disputes involving data interpretation, technical cause, or valuation. Proper expert testimony withstands cross‑examination and allows tribunals to make sound factual findings.

4.3 Aids Efficient Case Resolution

In ADR, expert evidence helps narrow disputes and can encourage settlement by giving both sides a realistic understanding of risks and values. In litigation, expert evidence reduces trial ambiguity, especially in technical fields.

5. Challenges in Nigeria’s Use of Expert Witnesses

Despite their usefulness, expert witnesses in Nigeria face practical challenges:

1. Credibility Issues: Courts have expressed concerns about experts who are poor communicators, biased for the appointing party, or lack proper methodology.
2. Mode of Appointment: Most experts are currently appointed by parties. Appellate courts have cautioned against uncritical reliance on party‑appointed experts and urged that expert witnesses assist the court neutrally.
3. Limited Standardisation: Unlike some jurisdictions, Nigeria does not have a formal accreditation process for expert witnesses, increasing the risk of unqualified testimony.

6. The Case for Broader and Better Use

6.1 Improving Judicial Accuracy

With increasingly sophisticated commercial disputes, Nigerian courts and ADR forums must lean more on experts to ensure just outcomes. Expert evidence helps reduce speculative judgments and improves the quality of judicial decisions.

6.2 Professionalising Expert Roles

Nigeria should consider establishing clearer standards for qualifying expert witnesses, perhaps borrowing from models in the UK and US, where criteria for expert admissibility and methodology are more developed.

6.3 Institutionalising Court‑Appointed Experts

To reduce bias and enhance trust, courts and arbitration institutions should broaden powers to appoint independent experts where appropriate.

Conclusion

Expert witnesses are an indispensable part of both litigation and ADR in Nigeria. They bridge the gap between legal reasoning and technical complexity, improve the quality of fact‑finding, and support efficient dispute resolution. Increasing their proper and regulated use not merely hiring experts for tactical advantage but to genuinely aid tribunals will enhance the credibility, efficiency, and fairness of Nigeria’s justice system in both courts and alternative dispute forums.

References

1. Queen Mary University of London, 2012 International Arbitration Survey: Current and Preferred Practices in the Arbitral Process (QMUL & White & Case 2012) https://www.qmul.ac.uk/arbitration/media/arbitration/docs/2012_International_Arbitration_Survey.pdf accessed 21 January 2026.
2. Queen Mary University of London, 2022 International Arbitration Survey: Adapting Arbitration to a Changing World (QMUL & White & Case 2022) https://www.qmul.ac.uk/arbitration/research/2022-international-arbitration-survey/ accessed 21 January 2026.
3. Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner (BCLP), BCLP Arbitration Survey 2021: Expert Evidence in International Arbitration (BCLP 2021) https://www.bclplaw.com/en/insights/publications/2021/bclp-arbitration-survey-expert-evidence.html accessed 21 January 2026.
4. HuygHe, S., & Chan, A. (2013). The evolution of expert witness law under UK and US jurisdictions. Const. L. Int’l, 8, 14.
5. Adeola A. Oluwabiyi (Ph. D) “A Comparative Legal Analysis of the Application of Alternative Dispute Resolution to Banking Disputes.” Journal of Law, Policy and Globalization VOl.38, 2015
6. Ankama, Aliu & Aliyu: “The Application of Arbitration for Effective Dispute Resolution in the Nigerian Banking Sector”. International Journal in Advanced Research in Social Engineering and Development Strategies. Vol.2 No.1 October 2014.
7. Kumar, M. (2011). Admissibility of expert evidence: Proving the basis for an expert’s opinion. Sydney Law Review, The, 33(3), 427-457.
8. Evidence Act 20211
9. Mediation and Arbitration Act (AMA) 2023
10. Blacks Law Dictionary
11. Omisore v. Aregbesola (2015) LPELR-24803 (SC) 111E–F.
12. Sowemimo & Anor v. The State (2004) LPELR-3108 (SC) 18C–D.
13. Wambai v. Kano Native Authority (1965) NMLR 15.
14. Jalbait Ventures (Nig) Ltd & Anor v. Unity Bank Plc (2016) LPELR-41625 (CA) 33–34A–C.
15. Kayode Ventures v. Minister, FCT (2010) 7 NWLR (Pt. 1192) 171 (SC).
16. A.G.F. v. Alhaji Atiku Abubakar & Ors (2002) 4 SCNJ 456.
17. Ogiale v. SPDC (Nig.) Ltd (1997) NWLR (Pt. 480) 148.
18. Stoyol & Anor v. INEC (2011) LPELR (CA).