Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T22:08:18.287Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Reflections on Some Judicial Decisions on the Construction of the Nigerian Land Use Act

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 July 2009

Oladipo O. Sholanke
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

For this exercise, three of the many new decisions of Nigerian courts on the interpretation of some provisions of the Nigerian Land Use Act have been chosen. Two of the decisions were delivered by the Supreme Court of Nigeria while one was by a Court of Appeal in Nigeria.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of African Law , Volume 37 , Issue 1 , Spring 1993 , pp. 89 - 96
Copyright
Copyright © School of Oriental and African Studies 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Act No. 6 of 29 March, 1978; cap. 202 L.F.N. 1990; [1978] J.A.L. Vol. 22, No. 2, 137. (“the Act”).

2 (1991) 7 N.W.L.R. (Part 205), 519 S.C.

3 Per Kawu, J.S.C., delivering the lead judgment. See (1991) 7 N.W.L.R. (Part 205), 519 at 530 S.C.

4 Ademola v. Amao (1982) O.G.S.L.R. 273; Chiroma v. Suwa (1986) 1 N.W.L.R. (part 109), 751 C.A. And see, Sholanke, Oladipo O., “When a revocation is not a revocation under the Nigerian Land Use Act”, (1990) J.U.S., Vol. 1, No. 8, 75–91.Google Scholar

5 S. 5(2) of the Act quoted by the court in support of its decision is, with respect, irrelevant. It is specifically provided that the subsection is operative, if at all, only in cases where a grant of a statutory right of occupancy is mad e by a Governor under s. 5(1) (a) of the Act.

6 See, e.g., (1991) 7 N.W.L.R. (Part 205), 519 at 546 S.C.

7 See, e.g. Registered Trustees of the Apostolic Chunk v. Olowoleni (1990) 6 N.W.L.R. (part 158), 514 S.C.; Governor of Lagos State v. Ojukwu (1986) 1 N.W.L.R. (Part 18), 621 S.C.

8 S. 37 of the Act.

9 Per Akpata, J.S.C., (1991) 7 N.W.L.R. (Part 205), 519 at 546 S.C.

10 Unreported Suit No. KWS/OM/5/86 of 9 June, 1987.

11 Unreported Suit No. CA/k/180/87 of 12 May, 1988.

12 Cap. 63 L.F.N. 1990.

13 The Act came into effect on 29 March, 1978.

14 Each Local Government in the country has similar powers in relation to lands in nonurban areas. See s. 6 of the Act.

15 I.e. under ss. 28(2)(b) and(c) and 28(3)(a) and (c) of the Act.

16 Ss. 29 and 6(5) of the Act.

17 Saude v. Abdullahi (1989) 4 N.W.L.R. (Part 116), 387 S.C.

18 (1991) 4 N.W.L.R. (Part 184), 157 S.C.

19 See also Ogunleye v. Oni (1990) 2 N.W.L.R. (Part 135), 745 S.C.

20 The methods of service of notice of revocation of a right of occupancy required to be served under s. 28 of the Act as prescribed are those prescribed in s. 44 of the Act. See Osho v. Foreign Finance Corporation (1991) 4 N.W.L.R. (Part 184), 157 at 196 S.C.

21 See also s. 33 of the 1979 Constitution, Cap. 62 L.F.N. 1990.

22 Per Obaseki, J.S.C., (1991) 4 N.W.L.R. (Part 184), 157 at 188 S.C.Google Scholar

23 By virtue of ss. 28 and 44 of the Act, a Governor has a duty to issue and serve a notice of revocation on the person being dispossessed. See, e.g., LSDPC v. Foreign Finance Corporation (1987) 1 N.W.L.R. (Part 50), 413 C.A.

24 Sholanke, , “When a revocation is not a revocation under the Nigerian Land Use Act”, at 75.Google Scholar

25 (1987) 1 N.W.L.R. (Part 50), 385 C.A.

26 (1992) 5 N.W.L.R. (Part 243), 599 G.A.

27 See, e.g., Tukur v. Government Gongola State (1989) 4 N.W.L.R. (Part 117), 517 S.C.; Salami v. Chairman LEDB (1989) 5 N.W.L.R. (Part 123), 539 S.C; Salati v. Shehu (1986) 1 N.W.L.R. (Part 15), 198 S.C; Peenok Investment Ltd. v. Hotel Presidential Ltd. (1982) 12 S.C. 1.

28 S. 39(1) (a) of the Act.

29 But see Salati's case, above.

30 Note that the new Constitution is substantially the same as the 1979 Constitution in this regard.

31 This was the view of Karibi-Whyte, J.S.C., in Salali's case, above.

32 (1992) 5 N.W.L.R. (Part 243), 599 at 617 C.A.

33 (1986) 4 N.W.L.R. (Part 35), 361 C.A.

34 (1990) 6 N.W.L.R. (Part 155), 210 C.A.

35 Above.

36 At 218.

37 At 614.

38 See ss. 47(l)(a) and (b) and 47(2).

39 E.g. Nkwocha v. Governor of Anambra State (1984) 6 S.C. 362.

40 At 615–617.

41 At 617.

42 But see Osipitan, , “The Land Use Act and the 1979 Constitution: conflicts and resolutions”, (1991) J.U.S., Vol. 12, No. 3 at 50.Google Scholar