By Sylvester Udemezue

BACKGROUND:

In a recent article titled “My Lord or My Lady? The Correct Mode of Addressing Female Judges,” Learned Silk, Eyimofe Atake, SAN, argues that female judges ought properly to be addressed as “My Lady” rather than “My Lord.” His central thesis is that insisting on addressing female judges as “My Lord” rests on an outdated legal fiction inherited from a bygone era when women were excluded from the legal profession. He contends that the traditional notion that “all members of the Bar are gentlemen” became obsolete following the enactment of the United Kingdom’s Sex Disqualification (Removal) Act 1919, which opened the legal profession to women. According to him, while the fiction that all lawyers are “gentlemen” may survive as harmless ceremonial language at Bar dinners, it becomes linguistically inaccurate and conceptually contradictory when relied upon in court to justify addressing a female judge as “My Lord.” He maintains that ordinary English, historical developments in the common law, and modern judicial practice require that female judges be addressed as “My Lady,” just as male judges are addressed as “My Lord.” In essence, the article advocates aligning Nigerian courtroom etiquette with what the author considers the correct and contemporary common-law practice, particularly that of England, where male and female judges are traditionally addressed as “My Lord” and “My Lady” respectively.

MY REACTION:

(1). INTRODUCTION:

Learned Silk Atake’s argument deserves commendation for reopening an important conversation on legal etiquette and courtroom tradition. His article is scholarly, stimulating and well-intentioned. Yet, with the greatest respect, I take a different view on one central proposition: that a female judge should necessarily be addressed as “My Lady” rather than “My Lord.” My respectful position is that, within the Nigerian legal profession and the wider common-law tradition from which our judicial practice derives, the professional and institutional expression applicable to every superior court judge, irrespective of gender, remains “My Lord” or “Your Lordship.” It is a professional designation attached to the judicial office rather than a biological description of the individual occupying that office. This distinction is fundamental.

(2). THE EXPRESSION DESCRIBES THE OFFICE, NOT THE GENDER:

The first point to appreciate is that courtroom forms of address are not ordinary conversational English. They belong to the specialised language of the law. Legal language frequently employs words that possess technical meanings different from their everyday usage. Thus, consideration, issue, execution, service, charge, equity, possession and injunction all carry meanings in law quite different from their ordinary dictionary meanings. The same applies to “My Lord.”
Within the courtroom, the expression is not a declaration that the judge is male. Rather, it is the institutional title by which the judicial office is respectfully addressed. Consequently, referring to a female Justice as “My Lord” does not transform her into a man any more than referring to a female professor as “Professor” transforms her into a man simply because the title historically developed in masculine form. Professional titles often transcend grammatical gender.

(3). THE HISTORICAL ORIGIN OF THE EXPRESSION:

The expression has deep roots in the English common-law system from which Nigeria inherited its legal institutions. For centuries, judges of the superior courts in England exercised the judicial authority of the Crown. Because of the exalted constitutional status of those courts, judges were addressed by titles reflecting the dignity of judicial office. Over time, expressions such as “My Lord,” “Your Lordship,” and “Their Lordships” became recognised courtroom forms of address for superior court judges. When women were later appointed to the Bench, English practice adapted by using “My Lady” or “Your Ladyship” for female High Court and appellate judges, while retaining “My Lord” for male judges. Today, the United Kingdom’s official judicial guidance distinguishes between “My Lord” for male judges and “My Lady” for female judges in the senior courts. That, however, is the present English practice.

(4). NIGERIAN COURTROOM PRACTICE HAS DEVELOPED ITS OWN CONVENTION:

The question for Nigeria is entirely different. Nigeria inherited English legal traditions but has never regarded itself as bound to reproduce every subsequent procedural evolution occurring in England. Indeed, many English rules have either been modified or abandoned in Nigeria, while many others have been retained notwithstanding subsequent changes in England. Similarly, our courtroom culture has developed its own settled professional convention. Across virtually every superior court in Nigeria, including the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeal, the Federal High Court, State High Courts and other superior courts of record, both male and female judges are commonly addressed as “My Lord,” “Your Lordship,” or “Their Lordships.” This has remained the accepted courtroom convention for decades. Importantly, no Nigerian statute, constitutional provision, Rule of Court or binding Practice Direction prohibits this usage. Until such a rule is authoritatively altered, long-established professional practice deserves respect.

(5). LEGAL REFORMS OR JUDICIAL ETIQUETTE IN ENGLAND DO NOT AUTOMATICALLY APPLY IN NIGERIA:

It is important to emphasise at this juncture that the mere fact that England has altered its judicial practice does not, without more, automatically effect a corresponding change in Nigeria. Nigeria is a sovereign and independent nation with its own Constitution, legal system and institutions. While our legal system was historically derived from the English common law and certain English statutes and legal principles became applicable in Nigeria through the applicable reception laws, subsequent developments, amendments or changes in English law, judicial practice or professional convention do not automatically become part of Nigerian law or legal practice. Since Nigeria attained constitutional independence, the evolution of Nigerian law has been determined by the Constitution, legislation enacted by the appropriate Nigerian legislative authorities, decisions of Nigerian courts and regulations or practice directions issued by competent Nigerian institutions. Thus, the fact that England now distinguishes between “My Lord” and “My Lady” as forms of judicial address does not, by itself, alter the long-established professional convention in Nigeria. Indeed, there are numerous rules of law, procedural practices and professional conventions inherited from England which have since been modified or abolished there but continue to operate in Nigeria until they are expressly amended or replaced by the appropriate Nigerian constitutional, legislative, judicial or professional authorities. Accordingly, if the long-established Nigerian convention of addressing judges as “My Lord” or “Your Lordship” is to be altered, such change ought to come through a deliberate and authoritative decision of the competent Nigerian institutions, not merely because England has adopted a different practice.

(6). THE TRADITION THAT “ALL MEMBERS OF THE BAR ARE GENTLEMEN”:

Much has been made of the old saying that “all members of the Bar are gentlemen.” This principle did not originate as an attempt to exclude women. Historically, English legal etiquette regarded every barrister as belonging to a single honourable profession whose members related to one another as equals despite differences in age, rank or status. When women entered the legal profession following the United Kingdom’s Sex Disqualification (Removal) Act 1919, they were admitted into that same professional fraternity. The traditional language of the profession continued to function largely as institutional terminology rather than a literal gender description. Accordingly, the maxim should not be understood today as denying the identity or dignity of female lawyers. Rather, it reflects the historical unity of the Bar as one indivisible profession. Professional terminology often survives social change without losing its technical significance.

(7). PROFESSIONAL USAGE SHOULD PREVAIL OVER LITERAL INTERPRETATION:

One danger in analysing courtroom language through ordinary grammatical rules is that technical legal expressions may be misunderstood. Nobody supposes that calling a corporation a “person” means it is a human being. Likewise, nobody imagines that the “reasonable man” in the law of negligence excludes women. Again, even outside the legal profession, the Holy Bible’s account that “man” was created by God on the sixth day has never been understood to exclude the fact that both man and woman were created on that same day. Legal terminology frequently acquires specialised meanings. Similarly, “My Lord” has, within Nigerian courtroom practice, evolved into an institutional professional title rather than a gender-specific description. That evolution deserves recognition.

(8). RESPECT FOR ESTABLISHED COURTROOM ETIQUETTE:

Courtroom etiquette exists primarily to preserve the dignity, impartiality and authority of the administration of justice. Its purpose is not to elevate judges above society but to maintain decorum within judicial proceedings. Whether one prefers “My Lord,” “My Lady,” “Your Honour,” or simply “Judge” is ultimately less important than ensuring that every mode of address reflects due respect for judicial office. Indeed, several common-law jurisdictions have adopted different approaches. While the United Kingdom retains “My Lord” and “My Lady” for many senior judges, jurisdictions such as Australia, Singapore and many courts in the United States generally prefer “Your Honour” or “Judge.” India has witnessed continuing debate, with courts affirming that respectful alternatives are acceptable while leaving the choice largely to professional practice. These differences demonstrate that forms of address are products of legal culture rather than immutable legal doctrine.

(9). SHOULD NIGERIA CHANGE?

Certainly, the legal profession is free to reconsider its traditions. If the Supreme Court of Nigeria, the National Judicial Council, the Body of Benchers or any other competent regulatory authority, after broad consultation, formally adopts a new and uniform protocol, the profession should faithfully comply. Until then, however, there is wisdom in preserving the settled professional usage that has served the Bench and the Bar for generations. Besides, reforms relating to legal or judicial etiquette should proceed through institutional consensus and due process, not individual preference.

(10). CONCLUSION:

The present discussion is not, and should never become, or be perceived as, a contest between tradition and gender equality. Rather, it is a conversation about professional language, legal history and institutional continuity. My learned friend, Eyimofe Atake, SAN, has rendered a valuable service by stimulating this debate. However, with profound respect, I remain persuaded that, within the Nigerian legal tradition as it presently stands, “My Lord” and “Your Lordship” are professional designations attached to the judicial office itself and may properly be used in addressing every superior court judge, irrespective of gender, unless and until the competent institutions of the Nigerian legal profession prescribe otherwise. There is absolutely nothing legally or professionally wrong with addressing a judge as “My Lord” or “Your Lordship.” The strength of the judiciary has never depended on the particular words used in salutation. Rather, it depends upon the independence, integrity, learning and courage of those who wear the judicial robe. Those enduring virtues deserve our highest respect, irrespective of whatever form of respectful address the law may ultimately choose to preserve.
Respectfully,
Sylvester Udemezue (Udems)
Proctor
The Reality Ministry of Truth, Law and Justice (TRM)
08021365545
udems@therealityministry.ngo
(31 July 2026)