This comparative analysis examines the operation of judicial precedent in Malaysia and Nigeria, two countries with distinct legal systems rooted in common law traditions. Judicial precedent, a fundamental aspect of common law jurisprudence, plays a crucial role in shaping the development of law and ensuring consistency and predictability in judicial decision-making. However, the application of precedent may vary significantly between jurisdictions due to differences in legal principles, judicial structures, and cultural contexts. Through a comprehensive review of case law, statutory provisions, and scholarly literature, this study explores the similarities and differences in the operation of judicial precedent in Malaysia and Nigeria. Key areas of analysis include the hierarchy of courts, principles of stare decisis, methods of distinguishing and overruling precedent, and the role of judicial discretion. By identifying commonalities and divergences in the application of judicial precedent, this research aims to enhance understanding of the complexities of common law systems and facilitate cross-jurisdictional comparative legal studies.