{"id":4486,"date":"2025-05-29T06:25:14","date_gmt":"2025-05-29T05:25:14","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/1stattorneys.com\/articles\/?p=4486"},"modified":"2025-05-29T06:25:14","modified_gmt":"2025-05-29T05:25:14","slug":"the-professional-etiquette-of-titles-why-nigerian-lawyers-cannot-use-barrister-as-a-prefix-while-engineers-use-engr","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/1stattorneys.ng\/articles\/2025\/05\/29\/the-professional-etiquette-of-titles-why-nigerian-lawyers-cannot-use-barrister-as-a-prefix-while-engineers-use-engr\/","title":{"rendered":"The Professional Etiquette of Titles: Why Nigerian Lawyers Cannot Use “Barrister” as a Prefix While Engineers Use “Engr.”"},"content":{"rendered":"\t\t
Introduction<\/span><\/b> In Nigeria, professional titles are a\nsignificant part of identity and recognition. However, the legal profession\nstands apart from others in its strict prohibition against using “Barrister”<\/i> as\na prefix before a lawyer\u2019s name. This restriction, upheld by the Nigerian Bar\nAssociation (NBA) and the courts, contrasts with other professions\u2014such as\nengineering and architecture\u2014where prefixes like “Engr.”<\/i> and “Arc.”<\/i> are\ncommonly accepted. This article examines: 1. The Prohibition on “Barrister” as\na Prefix<\/span><\/b> A. NBA v. Ofomata (2017) 5 NWLR (Pt. 1557) 128<\/span><\/b> The Nigerian judiciary formally declared\nin NBA v. Ofomata<\/i> that: “The appellation of \u2018Barrister\u2019 as a title before the name\nof a legal practitioner is unprofessional and improper.”<\/span><\/i> The court ruled that lawyers should instead\nuse conventional titles (Mr., Mrs., Chief, Dr.<\/i>) followed by “Barrister-at-Law”<\/i> or “Barrister\nand Solicitor”<\/i> if necessary. B. NBA\u2019s 2015 NEC Resolution<\/span><\/b> Before the court\u2019s decision, the NBA\u2019s National\nExecutive Committee (NEC) in Port Harcourt (November 2015)<\/b> resolved\nthat: “The use of the word \u2018Barrister\u2019 by any legal practitioner\nin Nigeria as a prefix to his name is against the ethics of the legal\nprofession.”<\/span><\/i> This reinforced the traditional practice\nin Common Law jurisdictions<\/b> (like the UK), where “Barrister”<\/i> is\na description of role, not a title<\/b>. C. Why the Restriction?<\/span><\/b> 2. Contrast with Other Professions: Why\n“Engr.,” “Arc.,” and “Dr.” Are Allowed<\/span><\/b> Unlike lawyers, professionals in engineering,\narchitecture, and medicine<\/b> routinely use prefixes. Here\u2019s why: A. Engineers (“Engr.”)<\/span><\/b> B. Architects (“Arc.”)<\/span><\/b> C. Medical Doctors (“Dr.”)<\/span><\/b> D. Accountants (ACA, ACCA)<\/span><\/b> 3. Consequences for Lawyers Who Use\n“Barrister” as a Prefix<\/span><\/b> Conclusion: A Matter of Professional Tradition<\/span><\/b> The prohibition against “Barrister”<\/i> as\na prefix is unique to the legal profession<\/b>, rooted in common\nlaw tradition and NBA regulations<\/b>. Meanwhile, engineers, architects, and\ndoctors freely use prefixes because their regulatory bodies permit it. For lawyers, compliance is not optional\u2014it is\na requirement of professional ethics<\/b>. For other professionals,\nunless their governing councils impose restrictions, titles like “Engr.”<\/i> and “Arc.”<\/i> remain\nvalid and widely accepted. Recommendation<\/span><\/b>\n
\n\n<\/span><\/div>\n
\n\n<\/span><\/div>\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n<\/span><\/div>\n
\n\n<\/span><\/div>\n