Empirical Study of Class Action Litigation Viability in Nigeria: Barriers and Reform Pathways

Class action litigation, which enables large groups of similarly situated plaintiffs to pursue their claims collectively, remains largely underdeveloped in Nigeria despite significant theoretical support for its adoption as a tool for access to justice and mass harm redress. This study empirically investigates the viability of class action litigation in Nigeria, examining the structural, procedural, and jurisprudential barriers that have prevented its development and mapping potential reform pathways. Using a mixed-methods research design, the study analyses 25 representative actions attempted in Nigerian courts between 2015 and 2024, conducts interviews with 30 litigation lawyers in Lagos, Abuja, and Port Harcourt, and surveys 100 civil society organisations engaged in public interest litigation. The research evaluates the adequacy of Order 13 of the Lagos State High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules and equivalent provisions in other states as vehicles for collective redress, comparing these with class action frameworks in the United States, Canada, and South Africa. Findings reveal that existing representative action rules are procedurally inadequate, that there is no certification mechanism for defining the class, and that costs rules effectively deter counsel from taking representative cases on contingency. This study fills a critical gap by providing the first systematic empirical analysis of representative litigation in Nigeria. Recommendations include the enactment of a Group Litigation Act, introduction of a class certification mechanism, reform of costs rules to facilitate access, and incentive structures for public interest litigants. Keywords: class action, representative actions, access to justice, litigation reform, collective redress