This article examines the concept of technicality, its associated challenges, and potential solutions, along with the demand for justice. It explores the concept of technicality in depth, considering the judiciary’s attitude towards it and finding that courts typically avoid technicality to serve justice. The paper compares the Nigerian legal system’s substantive and procedural laws, revealing that substantive law relies on procedural law for enforcement, with litigants often invoke procedural law to highlight technicalities. It also discusses the administration of justice and its forms, distinguishing between formal justice (strict application of laws) and substantive justice (application of laws to achieve justice), and addresses how courts handle litigation irregularities and technicalities. It is noted that technicalities are categorized into minor and substantial, with courts tending to disregard the former and focus on the latter. The article further investigates how laypeople and legally informed individuals perceive cases decided on technical grounds, finding a common view that technicalities often obstruct justice. It recommends that courts should require strict adherence to procedural laws (rules of the court), except where otherwise stated, and suggests that minor errors by litigants should be overlooked or corrected in the interest of justice, to ensure the administration of justice is seen as fair and equitable.