Hire-purchase occupies an unusual position in commercial law because it separates possession, periodic payment and legal title, creating recurring tension between contractual freedom and consumer protection. This article examines the interaction between minimum payment clauses and repossession, asking when an owner who retains title, has received substantial instalments and ultimately recovers the goods may legitimately impose further monetary liability on the hirer. Using doctrinal legal research and a functional comparative methodology, it analyses the Nigerian Hire-Purchase Act, Cap H4, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004, Nigerian judicial authority and the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act 2018, and compares selected rules in the United Kingdom and Australia governing termination, protected goods, repossession and post-repossession accounting. The analysis finds that Nigerian law has moved significantly away from unrestricted proprietary self-help, but its statutory architecture remains incomplete, particularly in relation to valuation, disposal, accounting for recovered value and functionally equivalent consumer asset-finance arrangements. The article advances compensatory proportionality as an organising principle: the owner should be protected against depreciation, damage, reasonable recovery costs and premature termination, but the cumulative effect of retained instalments, repossession and additional monetary claims should not exceed the owner's legitimate commercial interest without adequate justification. It concludes that Nigeria should modernise its hire-purchase framework through transparent post-repossession accounting, commercially reasonable valuation and disposal, digital disclosure requirements and expedited judicial recovery procedures, thereby making the owner whole without making the owner better than whole.

References

 Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act 2018 (Nigeria).  Hire-Purchase Act, Cap H4, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004.

 Consumer Credit Act 1974 (UK).  National Consumer Credit Protection Act 2009 (Cth), sch 1, National Credit Code (Australia).

 Ajenifuja Thompson Agboola v New Hope Agriculture and Technology Nigeria Ltd, National Industrial Court of Nigeria, judgment delivered 16 April 2026.

 Amusan and Thomas v Bentworth Finance (Nig) Ltd (1966) NMLR 276 (SC).  Andrew Ebohimi Omoijuanfo v Nigerian Technical Company Ltd (1976) All NLR 294 (SC).

 Associated Distributors Ltd v Hall [1938] 2 KB 83 (CA).  Bridge v Campbell Discount Co Ltd [1962] AC 600 (HL).

 Cavendish Square Holding BV v Makdessi; ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis [2015] UKSC 67.

 Civil Design Construction Nigeria Ltd v SCOA Nigeria Ltd (2007) 2 All NLR 243 (SC).  Cooden Engineering Co Ltd v Stanford [1953] 1 QB 86 (CA).

 Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co Ltd v New Garage & Motor Co Ltd [1915] AC 79 (HL).

 Helby v Matthews [1895] AC 471 (HL).

 Mr Akinniranye Babawale Akintomiwa v New Hope Agriculture and Technology Nigeria Ltd, National Industrial Court of Nigeria, judgment published 2026.

 Ibrahim, Nathan, Aderemi Olubunmi Oyebanji, Ifesinachi Charles Okonji, Collins Ekpenisi and Khadijat Ibrahim Maifada, ‘Examining the Nigerian Hire Purchase Act: Addressing Monetary Limitations and Imbalances in Legal Protection to Enhance Commercial Development’ (2025) 11(1)NIU Journal of Legal Studies 5–15.

 Nwankwo, Chioma Bernadine and Emeka Charles Nwankwo, ‘The Hirer’s Right to Walk Away and the Owner’s Right to Repossess: Revisiting Termination under Nigerian Hire-Purchase Law’ (2025) 2(2) Nnamdi Azikiwe University Journal of Private and Property Law 64.

 Ofo, Nat, ‘Repossession of Hire-Purchase Goods in Nigeria under the Hire-Purchase Act’ (2011) SSRN Electronic Journal, DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.1751455.

 Saidu, Saidu Alfa, ‘The Legal and Institutional Framework Governing Hire Purchase Agreements in Nigeria’ (2026), manuscript available on ResearchGate.

 Saidu, Saidu Alfa, ‘The Legal, Regulatory Challenges and Prospects of Hire Purchase in Nigeria’ (2026), manuscript available on ResearchGate.

Ziegel, Jacob S, ‘The Minimum Payment Clause Muddle’ (1964) 22(1) Cambridge Law Journal 108– 128, DOI: 10.1017/S000819730008171X.