One of the central facts, if not the most important of all, about the general legal systems of African countries is that they are derived wholly or partly from the legal systems of foreign countries, usually those of the former colonial power, though this is by no means the only source which has been drawn upon. Thus in Commonwealth Africa there has been extensive borrowing not only from the law of England, but from British India, from the provinces of South Africa, and to a less extent from other common-law jurisdictions, such as Queensland, New Zealand and Canada. This wholesale adoption of extraneous laws, sometimes unadapted, sometimes modified, immediately raises the fundamental question of the authority, if any, of judicial decisions in the donor country for the purpose of elucidating or determining the applicable law in the receiving country. There has been considerable discussion on this point, largely initiated by the writings of Elias and myself;1 and in the recent past the theme has been taken up by a number of other writers, especially those concerned with Nigerian and Ghanaian law.2

Nigeria like most other under-developed countries is presently faced with the enormous task of educating the main bulk of her citizens as one of the corner-stones for the economic development of the country. At present, the literate population, i.e. those who can read or write in any of the local languages or English, is well under ten per cent of the entire population of the country. Thus, we find that the vast majority of the people are illiterate not only in the local languages but also in the English language, which is the lingua franca of Nigeria. Illiteracy, therefore, is for Nigeria a fact of life with which the law makers have to reckon. English being the lingua franca has meant that the bulk of official and commercial transactions are done in that language, though only a minute percentage of the population is conversant with it.