Nigeria’s legal order is characterised by the simultaneous operation of constitutional law, legislation, customary law, Islamic law and regional and international human-rights standards. Although formal guarantees prohibit discrimination on grounds including sex, women’s substantive enjoyment of rights remains uneven, especially in inheritance, matrimonial property, custody, harmful practices and access to justice. This article critically examines how Nigeria can reconcile customary and cultural norms with constitutional and international standards without treating customary law either as immune from review or as incapable of development. It adopts comparative legal analysis of constitutional provisions, legislation, reported judicial decisions, regional and international instruments and recent socio-legal scholarship. Particular attention is paid to the judicial trajectory from Mojekwu v Mojekwu through Ukeje v Ukeje and Anekwe v Nweke to the 2024 Court of Appeal decision in Fidelis Agbege v Shedrack Oriloye. The analysis finds that Nigerian courts have increasingly rejected discriminatory customary rules, but formal legal gains remain constrained by fragmented implementation, weak enforcement, limited legal awareness and the continuing social authority of discriminatory norms. The article argues for rights-compatible legal pluralism: customary law should remain capable of culturally legitimate evolution, while constitutional equality and human dignity operate as non-negotiable limits. Sustainable reform, therefore, requires doctrinal coherence, effective institutions, accessible remedies and locally grounded legal education.