An Empirical Analysis of Judicial Remedies for Breach of Fiduciary Duty in Nigerian Corporate Law

Fiduciary relationships impose some of the most stringent obligations known to private law, yet the empirical study of how Nigerian courts identify, apply, and remedy breaches of fiduciary duty in the corporate context remains underdeveloped. This study presents an empirical analysis of judicial remedies for breach of fiduciary duty in Nigerian corporate law, drawing on a dataset of 60 reported cases from the Supreme Court, Court of Appeal, and Federal High Court decided between 2017 and 2024. Using a mixed-methods research design that combines quantitative coding of case outcomes with qualitative doctrinal analysis, the research identifies the types of fiduciary relationships most frequently litigated, the remedial preferences of Nigerian courts including account of profits, constructive trust, and equitable compensation, and the factors that influence the choice of remedy. The study fills a critical gap in the empirical literature on Nigerian equity law, where case law analysis has predominantly been qualitative. Findings reveal that Nigerian courts systematically under-utilise account of profits in breach of fiduciary duty claims, defaulting to common law compensatory damages even in cases where disgorgement would better serve the deterrent objectives of fiduciary law. The research further reveals significant judicial divergence between commercial and non-commercial fiduciary relationships. Recommendations include judicial guidelines on remedy selection, statutory codification of core fiduciary duties under the Companies and Allied Matters Act, and enhanced academic-judicial engagement on equitable remedies. Keywords: fiduciary duty, corporate law, judicial remedies, equity, account of profits