Introduction
The rise of digital communication has changed how people and businesses negotiate, transact, and record agreements. Nowadays, important decisions, from business deals to rental agreements, are often made through WhatsApp, SMS, and other chat platforms. This trend raises a key legal question: Can WhatsApp messages be considered valid contracts in Nigeria? Also, can screenshots of these messages be used as evidence in court?
This article examines the legal validity of digital agreements under Nigerian law, the manifestation of contractual elements in chat-based communications, the requirements for the admissibility of screenshots as electronic evidence, the challenges associated with authentication, and the judiciary’s evolving approach to modern communication patterns.
Electronic Agreements in Nigeria: The Legal Foundation
Nigeria’s legal framework has significantly evolved from the era when only handwritten or printed documents were considered binding. With technology influencing nearly every aspect of business and personal transactions, the law has adapted accordingly.
A recent example is seen in FRN v. Godwin Ifeanyi Emefiele,[1] where WhatsApp chat logs and mobile phone evidence were admitted in court. The Ikeja High Court accepted messages between a contractor and an aide referencing a USD $400,000 payment as part of an alleged corrupt transaction[2]. This case illustrates how Nigerian courts now routinely consider digital messages as part of the evidentiary landscape.
Several statutes recognize electronic documents and digital communications as capable of creating legal obligations:
a. The Evidence Act 2011
The Evidence Act (“the Act”) revolutionized the handling of digital evidence in Nigeria. Sections 84, 85, and 258 of the Act explicitly acknowledge the admissibility of electronic records, including: Messages, email-generated documents, digital photographs, and screenshots. These provisions form the legal basis for treating WhatsApp chats as legitimate documentary evidence.
b. Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Act 2015
The Cybercrimes Act validates electronic signatures[3], digital contracts, and Online communications as capable of generating enforceable obligations. Actions such as clicking “I accept,” sending a confirmation message, or agreeing to terms via chat may constitute valid electronic agreements.
c. NITDA Guidelines on Electronic Communication
The Nigerian Information Technology Development Agency (NITDA)[4] supports electronic transactions and recognizes digital records as legally valid instruments.
Together, these instruments make it clear: Nigerian law firmly embraces electronic agreements, including WhatsApp messages.
Digital Agreements in Nigeria: When Your WhatsApp Messages become a Contract
A Case Study
Mr. Ola and Mr. Dapo concluded their tenancy negotiations entirely through WhatsApp. They discussed the rent amount, payment modality, duration, handover date, and other essential terms. Relying on the exchange, Mr. Dapo made financial commitments, believing the agreement was final.
However, Mr. Ola later attempted to renege, denying the existence of any binding arrangement. His defence was dismissive: “Which judge will accept WhatsApp messages? That is not a real contract.”
The above scenario is increasingly common. Also, many individuals routinely accept contractual terms, such as caller-tune subscriptions, data plans, and service prompts, by simply tapping “Agree,” often without realizing that they may have entered into binding agreements.
This issue arose in MTN Nigeria Communications Ltd v. Barr. Achunulo Godwin Jnr (CA/OW/456/2019), where the Court of Appeal held that contracts can indeed be made via SMS and that the essential elements of a valid contract may be satisfied through digital communication. Justice Ntong F. Ntong JCA declared that the argument that contracts cannot arise via SMS “holds no water.”[5]
The Four Essential Elements of a Valid Contract as reflected in WhatsApp Messages
a. Offer
A message stating specific terms such as: “I will rent the apartment to you for ₦700,000 for one year, payable upfront.”
b. Acceptance
Clear responses like: “I agree.” “Consider it done,” or even “Okay, I will pay on Friday,” all indicate acceptance. In some contexts, even emoji reactions such as a thumb-up may amount to acceptance when viewed within the full context of communication.
c. Consideration
This reflects the value exchanged. It may appear as negotiated payment terms, proof of transfer, or confirmation of financial obligations.
d. Intention to create legal Relations
Where discussions involve rent, business deals, sale of goods, services, or employment, the law presumes an intention to be legally bound. Social chatter or jokes, however, do not constitute contracts.
Based on the four (4) principles above, the WhatsApp exchange between Mr. Ola and Mr. Dapo could meet all requirements for a valid and binding contract.
The Admissibility of WhatsApp Screenshots in Nigerian Courts
Screenshots constitute documentary evidence under Nigerian law. However, to be admissible, they must satisfy the strict requirements of Section 84 of the Evidence Act. Courts reiterated this position in Orogun & Anor v. Fidelity Bank[6].
To admit screenshots:
1. The device used to produce them must be identified.
2. It must be shown that the device was operating properly during the relevant period.
3. The information must have been produced in the ordinary course of use.
4. A Certificate of Compliance must accompany the screenshots.
In FRN v. Godwin Emefiele[7], the court even granted a forensic review of the device containing WhatsApp chats to ensure compliance[8].
Thus, screenshots, once viewed as novel, have become mainstream evidence in Nigerian litigation.
When WhatsApp Agreements Fail: Situations Where Courts May Not Enforce Chat-Based Contracts
While WhatsApp messages may create binding agreements, they are not always enforceable. Courts will decline enforcement where:
a. Negotiations are incomplete – parties have not reached a concluded agreement.
b. Messages are vague or ambiguous – e.g., “We’ll talk later,” “Let’s see how it goes.”
c. There is no intention to create legal relations, such as those arising from casual or humorous exchanges.
d. The law requires a formal written document, such as transactions involving the transfer of interests in land, wills, or certain banking instruments.
e. Issues of capacity or duress arise – agreements must be voluntary and entered into by persons with legal capacity.
Conclusion
Digital communication has undeniably transformed the landscape of personal and commercial transactions in Nigeria. WhatsApp messages, once perceived as informal chatter, now play a central role in negotiations and agreements. Nigerian law, through the Evidence Act, Cybercrimes Act, and judicial decisions, fully recognizes that valid contracts can be formed through chat-based interactions, provided they contain the essential elements of offer, acceptance, consideration, and intention to create legal relations.
Similarly, screenshots of such conversations are admissible as evidence once authenticated in accordance with the Evidence Act.
As society continues to lean on digital platforms for daily transactions, individuals and businesses must be more conscious of the legal weight their messages carry. A simple “I agree,” or a thumbs-up emoji may bind a party more firmly than anticipated.
In today’s legal environment, if you commit to a term in writing, even on WhatsApp, you may very well be bound by it.
Author
Jessica Onyinyechukwu Osademe
Trainee Associate
Rosewood Legal
josademe@rosewoodlegal.com
Co-author
Lateefat Omotomilola Hakeem-Bakare
Principal Partner
Rosewood Legal
lhakeem-bakare@rosewoodlegal.com
Published on Thursday, December 11, 2025
References: [1] Federal Republic of Nigeria v. Godwin Ifeanyi Emefiele, FCT High Court, Maitama, Abuja, Suit No. FCT/HC/CR/577/2023 (Justice Hamza Mu’azu, Trial Court), [2] The vanguard newspaper, Oct 9, 2025, [3] Section 17 Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention Etc.) Act 2015, Section 93(2) Evidence Act 2011, [4] The Nigerian Information Technology Development ACT 2007, [5] MTN Nigeria Communications LTD v Barr Achunulo Godwin CA/0W/456/2019 – delivered 4th July 2025, [6] Mr. Felix Orogun & Anor V Fidelity bank (2018) Legalpedia (CA0 91217, [7] Emefiele (n 1) 1, [8] Abujapress news, published September 15, 2025