A caveat may be entered against the issue of the registrar's certificate by any person whose consent to the marriage is required by law, or by anyone who knows of any just cause why the marriage should not be celebrated.

The caveat is entered by writing the word 'Forbidden' opposite the entry of the notice in the Marriage Notice Book and appending the writer's name, address and grounds on which he claims to forbid the issue of the certificate. Once this is done, the registrar may not issue his certificate until the caveat is removed. He is required by law, in that case, to refer the matter to a judge of the High Court of the State.

The judge is empowered to summon the parties to the intended marriage and the person who entered the caveat to appear before him. He must then require the caveator to justify his grounds for objecting to the issue of the registrar's certificate. The judge must hear and determine the case in a summary way, subject to a right of appeal to the Supreme Court.

If the judge is satisfied that the grounds for opposing the issue of the certificate are insufficient, he may remove the caveat by fueling the word 'Forbidden' in the Marriage Notice Book. He then writes below the entry and cancellation the words 'Cancelled by Order of the High Court', and signs his name there. The registrar then issues his certificate, and the marriage may proceed as if no caveat had been entered. In computing the three months' period in relation to the notice of marriage, the time that elapses between the ntering of the caveat and its removal is not taken into account.

The grounds on which a caveat may be successfully entered include, inter alia, that one of the parties to the intended marriage is already married to a third party, either under the Marriage Act or under customary law. Where an existing marriage is alleged, it must be satisfactorily proved. Mere engagement or betrothal of one party to a third party is not enough. In Olikagbue v Olikagbue the caveatrix, Victoria Olikagbue, entered a caveat with the registrar of marriages, Benin, against the proposed marriage between one Christopher Olikagbue and a woman, Anthonia E. Oghobanghaae. The caveatrix aUedged that she was married to Christopher Olikagbue in 1954 according to the customary law of their people of Owarrealubor, in the Agbor District of Bendel State. The respondent, Christopher, paid the customary dowry, and she was later 'led home' to the respondent as his wife, in the customary manner. There were six children of the marriage. In 1966 the respondent deserted her and arranged to many Anthonia. Idigbe, CJ, held that a valid customary-law marriage was subsisting between the petitioner and respondent and that therefore the respondent could not marry Anthonia.

This case may be contrasted with the leading case atbxthe Matter of the Marriage Ordinance (Berkley and Abiodun). Bcckley. a Lagosian, while living in Lagos, became engaged to Miss Alade of Lagos. He later left Lagos for Jos. While he was there, his father, at Bcckley's request and authorization, effected the payment of dowry and celebration of the Idana ceremony in accordance with Yoruba customary law. Miss Alade continued lo live with her parents in Lagos. Meanwhile, Bcckley met Miss Abiodun in Jos and they agreed to marry each other. Notice of the intended marriage was given to the registrar of marriage at Jos. Bcckley's father entered a caveat on the ground that the Idana ceremony in respect of Miss Alade constituted a valid marriage by roruba custom and so precluded a marriage under the Marriage Act with Miss Abiodun. It was held that: the performance of the Idana ceremony without a subsequent taking of the girl to the intended husband's house did not effect a marriage by Yoruba (Lagos) law and custom so as to preclude the intended husband from making a marriage with another person under the provision of the Marriage Ordinance.

On the other hand in Kufonji v Jegede. The caveatrix, one Mrs. FA. Kuforiji, filed a caveat against the intended marriage of one Augustine Kuforiji and Augustina Jegede in June 1970. She claimed that she was married under Otan Aiyegbaju customary law to Augustine Koforiji. It was alleged that Idana was paid to the father of die caveatrix who formally handed her over to die father of Augustine. Evidence was led concerning the essentials of customary marriage in Otan Aiyegbaju which is a Yoruba town in Oyo State. The caveatrix failed to prove that Idana was paid in connection with the marriage or that there was any formal handing over of the bride. It was held that the payment of bride price is an essential element of a valid Yoruba customary law marriage. In this case, there was no payment of bride price nor the solemn handing over of the bride which are essentials for customary law in Otan Aiyegbaju. Consequently, there was a mere promise of marriage by the intended husband, and not a subsisting marriage.