Federal High Court Issues New Rules For Pre-Election Cases

New Federal High Court rules permit weekend filings, virtual hearings and nationwide transfer of election cases by the Chief Judge.

The Federal High Court has issued a new set of Practice Directions to govern the conduct of pre-election cases, repealing the 2022 guidelines and introducing sweeping reforms aimed at ensuring the speedy, efficient and fair resolution of election-related disputes ahead of future elections.

The Federal High Court (Pre-Election) Practice Directions, 2026, signed by the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, Hon. Justice John Terhemba Tsoho, took effect on June 29, 2026.

The new rules introduce several innovations, including the filing of pre-election cases on weekends and public holidays, virtual hearings, strict limits on adjournments, and expanded powers for the Chief Judge to transfer cases to any judicial division of the court across the country.

In a press statement signed by the Director of Information of the Federal High Court, Dr. Catherine Oby Christopher, the court said the Practice Directions were issued to enhance the timely disposition of pre-election matters in line with the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended), the Electoral Act, 2026, and other applicable laws.

According to the statement, the new Practice Directions repeal the Federal High Court (Pre-Election) Practice Directions, 2022, and provide a revised framework to improve the management of pre-election litigation.

Among the most significant innovations is the directive that registries of the Federal High Court in all judicial divisions across the country will remain open on Saturdays, Sundays and public holidays between 10:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m. exclusively for the filing of pre-election cases.

The measure is intended to ensure that litigants are not hindered by the constitutional time limits governing election disputes.

The Practice Directions also empower judges handling pre-election matters to leverage technology in conducting proceedings, including holding virtual hearings where appropriate.

In addition, the Chief Judge is authorised to nominate judges to hear pre-election matters in any judicial division and to transfer such cases from one division to another whenever necessary.

The court explained the objective is to promote efficient case management and ensure the timely resolution of disputes arising from party primaries and other pre-election matters.

Under the new regime, every pre-election suit must be commenced by Originating Summons, except where allegations of fraud, forgery or other highly contentious facts are made.

In such instances, parties are required to provide particulars of the allegations, which may be established through oral evidence or documentary exhibits.

The Practice Directions prescribe strict timelines for the filing of court processes.

Respondents are required to enter appearance within seven days of being served and file their defence within 10 days, while applicants may file replies within three days, where necessary.

To discourage lengthy legal arguments, written addresses must be concise, typed in 12-point font, double-spaced and must not exceed 15 pages.

The court also placed fresh obligations on litigants challenging the conduct or outcome of political party primaries by requiring them to join all relevant parties to enable the court effectively determine the dispute.

In a bid to curb delays that have historically characterised election litigation, the Practice Directions provide that no party shall ordinarily be granted more than two adjournments throughout the proceedings.

It further states that applications for adjournment will not be entertained on dates already fixed for hearing.

Where a party changes legal representation during the pendency of a case, the court also limited adjournments arising from such changes to a maximum of two.

The Practice Directions direct courts to give priority to all pre-election cases until judgment is delivered and require judges to fix hearing dates within seven days after parties have exchanged all necessary processes.

Where one of the parties is absent on the hearing date despite having been duly notified, the court may deem that party’s written address as adopted and proceed with the case.

The court also formally recognises the use of electronic communication in pre-election proceedings.

Judges may notify counsel of urgent court events through email or other electronic means, provided such notices are issued at least 48 hours before the scheduled court date. Parties are equally required to provide functional telephone numbers and email addresses to the court registry.

On interlocutory applications, the Practice Directions reaffirm the constitutional requirement that preliminary objections and other jurisdictional issues should generally be determined alongside the substantive suit at the stage of final judgment, except where the objection concerns the service of originating processes.

Applications seeking extension of time must now be brought by motion on notice and supported by affidavits setting out substantial, cogent and verifiable reasons for the delay.

The Practice Directions further encourage judges to explore the possibility of amicable settlement before proceeding to full hearing where circumstances permit.

They also preserve all proceedings instituted before the commencement of the new rules, while empowering courts to issue appropriate directions to ensure pending cases conform to the new procedural framework.

The Federal High Court said the overriding objectives of the Practice Directions are to ensure fair, impartial and expeditious determination of pre-election disputes, minimise delays and interlocutory applications, encourage settlement where possible, and guarantee that parties focus only on issues genuinely in controversy.