“Even if the property is built on the land of the respondents, the answer is not inself-help but in commencing a legal action to abate the trespass.”
NikiTobi, J.S.C.
Okochi & Ors v. Animkwoi &Ors
(2003) LPELR-2455(SC) P. 18, paras. A-D
1.0 PREVIEW
1.1 Most Nigerians who would have invested their business capitals inbusinesses that would have been driving the economy positively are constrainedto invest their capitals in landed properties. They are so constrainedconsidering the harsh business climate in Nigeria due to high interest rate, multipletaxation, poor infrastructure and the lack of the required nationalenergy/electricity to power the Nigerian economy. In fact the 2018 GlobalCompetitiveness Report of the World Economic Forum ranked Nigeria as 125thout of 137 countries in terms of ease of doing business.
1.2 A lot of people who have invested or diverted all their life earnings orbusiness capital into investment in real estate are currently at the junctureof losing everything to fraudulent land vendors, omo-oniles, land grabbers,land scammers or fellow victims.
1.3 Thus, the focus of this edition of Akintunde Esan’sLegal Illumination is the legal remedies available to the victims of fraudulent land transactions inNigeria and their chances of getting theses remedies in the Court of Law inNigeria? What are the issues the Courtwill pay attention to, in deciding who is legally entitled to a landed propertyin a land dispute?
2.0 RELEVANTISSUES THE COURT WILL CONSIDER
2.1 Here are some relevant points of law you need to know on how to secureor recover your landed property in the Court of law in Nigeria.
2.2 Ways of proving Right or Title to Land to Land in Nigeria
2.2.1 Under Nigerian land law jurisprudence, ithas been consistently held by the Courts[1] that there are five ways of proving title to land. A Claimantmay rely on more than one mode of proving title; if he so desires; however, onemode of proving title will suffice, if properly established to the satisfactionof the Court. The five ways of proving title to land propounded by the Supreme Courtin Idundun v.Okumagba[2] are:-
a) Traditional evidence.
b) Production of document of title
c) Proof of acts of ownership
d) Acts of long possession and enjoyment of the land
e) By proof of possession of adjacent land
2.3 ILLUMINATION ON THE FIVE WAYS OF PROVING TITLE TO LAND INNIGERIA
2.3.1 TRADITIONAL EVIDENCE OR HISTORY ON LAND
2.3.1.1 The Law, in itswisdom, allows traditional evidence, most probably, in view of the fact thatmuch of our past is practically unrecorded[3]. The Clear evidence of the wisdom of the Law in this regard could befound in Section 44 of the Evidence Act (applicable at the material time; now,Section 66 of the Evidence Act, 2011) which delisted this category of evidencefrom the hear-say rule and elevated it to the status of admissible evidence[4]
2.3.1.2 The Courts haverecognised the obvious fact that the witnesses, who are called upon to givetraditional evidence, would not necessarily be in a position to give aneye-witness account. Invariably, such witnesses cannot speak from personalknowledge as they merely repeat the story which their ancestors had told them[5].
2.3.1.3 Who can give Evidence of Traditional History?
2.3.1.3.1 The Court ofAppeal per Ekanem, J.C.A in Abo v. Aanyam[6]held that:
"As to there being no onefrom the grantor's family who testified, for the appellant, it is my view thatthe evidence of DW2 (the appellant) who was shown to have been sufficientlyclose to the grantor to be in a position to testify on the history of thefounding of the land by the grantor was sufficient”.
2.3.1.4 In Oyekola v. Ajibade[7] Adekeye, JCA, as he then was, held that traditional history:
"... is given by witnesses who by their close association,interaction or special relationship with the land owing family areknowledgeable enough to give cogent and relevant traditional evidence inrespect of ownership of the land."
2.3.1.5 Relevant Issues in Evidence of Traditional History
2.3.1.5.1 Where a party relies on traditional evidence or history to prove title to land he is obligedto plead and prove[8] –
a) who founded theland.
b) how the land wasfounded.
c) the names andparticulars of successive owners of the land through whom he claims.
2.3.2 DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE
2.3.2.1 A Claimant canestablish his title to land in dispute by production of documents of title[9] Such documents of title must be duly authenticated in that their due execution mustbe proved unless they are produced from proper custody in circumstances whichgives rise to the presumption of due execution in the case of documents whichare 20 years old or more at the date of the transaction[10].
2.3.2.2 However where the Plaintiff relies on and tenders documents of title ashis source of title, the Court has the inevitable duty to inquire on thefollowing questions:
a) Whether the document of title is genuine and valid;
b) Whether it has been duly executed, stamped and registered;
c) Whether the grantor had the authority and capacity to make the grant;
d) Whether in fact the grantor had what he purported to grant; and
e) Whether it has the effect claimed by the holder of the instrument.
2.3.2.3 It therefore means that, the mere production of a document of title,even though valid on its face, will not necessarily carry with it automaticrelief by grant of the declaration of title sought. The Court will have tosatisfy itself by taking into consideration the above enumerated factors.[11]
2.3.2.4 Relevant Land Documentary Evidence
2.3.2.4.1 The means of acquisition of a land determinesthe necessary legal documentary evidence:
a) Purchase- Purchase Receipt, Deed ofAssignment.
b) Leasing/Renting- Deed of Lease or Lease Agreementor Tenancy Agreement.
c) Devolution- Testate – Will/Probate orIntestate - Letter of Administration.
d) Gift orGrant - Deed ofGrant or Gift.
e) Allotment offamily or communal land - TraditionalEvidence or Minutes of Meeting.
f) Saleor Purchase on behalf of another - Power of Attorney
g) Proof ofIdentity and location of the land - Survey Plan
h) Statutory Right of Occupancy - Certificate of Occupancy
2.3.2.4.2 Investing your hard earnedmoney in a land or landed property without the necessary legal documentaryevidence is holding a timed bomb in your hand. Legal protection of yourproperty is to have all the necessary legal documentary evidence that,guarantees and protects your right to exclusiveownership or exclusive possession of your property.
2.3.2.4.3 Due Diligence - Verification of the Status of Landed Property
2.3.2.4.3.1 Also,investing your hard earned money in a land or landed property without firstconducting due diligence on the legal status of the property is financialsuicide. Conductingdue diligence is to verify the legal status of the property you intend topurchase before purchasing it. Due diligence is best done by professionals. Duediligence includes:
a) Conducting searches in the Land Registry: To knowwhether the land is encumbered e.g. mortgaged.
b) Chartingof Survey Plan at the Office of the Surveyor-General: To verify whether the land hasbeen acquired by Government or the right of occupancy has been revoked or hasthe right setback.
For further legal illumination on the necessary relevant documentary evidence for your landand the verification of the Status ofLanded Property you may contact Akintunde Esan or Ase Olodumare Chambers.
2.3.3 ACTS OF OWNERSHIP
Proofof acts of ownership in and over the land in dispute such as selling, leasing,making grant or farming on it or a portion thereof extending over a sufficientlength of time, numerous and positive enough to warrant the inference that theperson exercising such proprietary acts is the true owner of the land. It should be noted, however, that acts of ownership canonly rest on a proved title. Valid title is a 'quo warranto' for acts ofownership.[12]
It is now well settled that in a case of competing claims for title,except in cases in which the issue is which side has succeeded in provingnumerous and positive acts of ownership spreading over a sufficiently long timeto warrant an inference of ownership[13].
2.3.3.1 When Acts can qualify as Acts of Ownership.
When a party's root of title is pleaded as, say a grant, or a sale orconquest, etc, that root has to be established first and any consequential actsfollowing therefrom can then properly qualify as acts of ownership. In otherwords, acts of ownership are done because of and in pursuance of the ownership[14].
2.3.4 ACTS OF LONG POSSESSION AND ENJOYMENT OF THE LAND
2.3.4.1 Proof by acts of long possession and enjoyment of the land which primafacie may be evidence of ownership not only of the particular piece of landwith reference to which such acts are done, but also of other land so situateand connected there with by locality or similarity that the presumption under Section 143 of Evidence Act[15],applies and the inference can be drawn that what is true of the one piece ofland is likely to be true of the other piece of land.
2.3.4.2 In Mogaji v. Cadbury Nig. Ltd[16],it was held[17]:-
a) Once a party pleads and traces the root of his title to a particularperson or family he must establish how that person also came to have titlevested in him. He cannot ignore the proof of his overlord’s title and rely onlong possession.
b) Long possession does not confer title on a party where another traceshis title to the true owners, unless such possession is of such a nature as tooust the title of the true owner by acquiescence[18].
c) Long possession can only be used to defeat a claim for declaration oftitle and trespass and not to establish a claim for declaration of title anddamages for trespass against the true owners.
d) Possession being nine points of the law, the attitude of the courts hasbeen to move in to protect it[19].
e) It cannot be lost sight of that possession resides in the Claimant thatestablishes a better title[20].
2.3.5 PROOF OF POSSESSION OF CONNECTED OR ADJACENT LAND
2.3.5.1 Proof of possession of connected or adjacent land in circumstancesrendering it probable that the owner of such connected or adjacent land wouldin addition be the owner or the land in dispute.
2.3.5.2 Possession and Presumption of Ownership
Whenthe question is whether any person is owner of anything of which he is shown tobe in possession, the burden of proving that he is not the owner is on theperson who affirms that he is not the owner[21].It is generally said that possession raises apresumption of ownership but, such presumption cannot stand when another personproves a good title[22].
2.3.5.3 Trespassto Land and Possession
It is trite that the wrong of trespass toland is to without lawful justification[23]:
(a) enterupon the land in the possession of the Claimant, or
(b) remainupon such land, or
(c) place orproject any material object upon it –
Generally speaking, as a claim for trespassto land is rooted in exclusive possession, all a Plaintiff need to prove isthat he has exclusive possession, or he has the right to such possession, ofthe land in dispute but once a Defendant claims to be the owner of the land indispute, title to it is put in issue, and in order to succeed, the Plaintiffmust show a better title than that of the Defendant[24].
A trespass to land is an entry upon land or any direct and immediateinterference with the possession of land. The comprehensive way of describing atrespass is to say that the defendant broke and entered the Plaintiff's closeand did damage, and it follows that in order to maintain an action for trespassthe Plaintiff must have a present possessory title, an owner of land who islegally entitled to possession not being competent to maintain an action fortrespass before entry[25].
Where indeed both parties are in a field claiming possession thepossession being disputed, trespass will be at the suit of that one who canshow that the title is in him[26].
2.3.5.4 Claimin an Action for Trespass and Claim for Recovery of Possession
A claim in an action for trespass to landpresupposes that the Plaintiff is in possession, actual or constructive, of theland in dispute at the time of the trespass and that the trespasser defendantcannot by the mere fact of his entry unto the land secure lawful possession.
On the other hand, a claim for recovery ofpossession postulates that the Plaintiff is not in possession at the time ofthe action and that he was once in possession but is at the time of the actionseeking to be restored to possession of the land[27].
The claims for damages for trespass and forrecovery of possession are self-contradictory and should not be joinedtogether, as one postulates that the Plaintiff was in possession at therelevant time, while the other suggests he was not[28].
2.3.5.5 Limitation Period for making Claims on Land
By virtue of the Limitation Laws[29] in Nigeriaand the Limitation Act, a right of action for recovery of land is extinguishedtwelve years after the date on which the cause of action accrued.
2.4 RELEVENTS POINTS OF LAW ON THE DECLARATION OF TITLE TO LAND IN NIGERIA
2.4.1 Identity of Land[30]
2.4.1.1 Proof of identityof a piece of land in dispute is of utmost importance if any success is to beattained in any land suit. A Plaintiff seeking for declaration of title to landhas a cardinal duty to show, with certainty, the area of land being claimed andto which he wants the order of court to relate to; failure to do so, the entirecase is at the risk of being dismissed[31].
2.4.2 When it is not Necessary
2.4.2.1 The position ofthe law is that survey plan is not necessary where there is proper identification of the land in dispute vide thepleadings and evidence[32]. Where the land in dispute is known toboth parties or is clearly ascertainable whether form the averments in pleadingor otherwise and its area, exact location and precise boundaries on the groundare either unmistakably and appropriately pleaded or are admitted oracknowledged by the defendant, the non-production in evidence of the survey planof such land cannot be a matter of great moment and does not disentitle the Plaintifffrom maintaining an action in respect of title, trespass or injunction oversuch land[33].
2.4.3 When it is necessary
2.4.3.1 It issettled law that where the identity of the land in dispute is in dispute, thereis need to produce a survey plan particularly if the facts produced in evidencecannot establish, with certainty, the identity of the said land[34].Where parties file different plans on both side, it will be the duty of the partywho disputes the identity of the land (and who wants to succeed), to file a composite plan where that becomesnecessary or as the court may order direct at the trial. The purpose of filinga composite plan is to fix and delimit the land in dispute[35].
2.4.4 Credible Evidence on the Root of the Title of Predecessor
The law is clearthat it is not enough for a Plaintiff seeking a declaration of title to land tolead evidence to trace his title to a particular person. He must go beyond thatto establish by credible evidence the root of that person's title otherwisetitle will not be declared in him.[36]
2.4.5 Evidence on the Nature of Title to Land
In line with thedecision in Bassey v. Pamol Nigeria Ltd[37], and a host of other authorities, in order for a Plaintiff to succeedin a claim for declaration of title to land, the Court must be satisfied as to:
a. The precise nature of the title claimed, that is whether it is the titleby virtue of original ownership, Customary grant, conveyance, sale underCustomary law, long possession or otherwise; and
b. Evidence establishing title, of the nature claimed. Where the claim is based on traditional evidence, in order to qualify asreliable traditional testimony, a party relying on same must plead the name ornames of the founder of the land and those after him, the person the landdevolved to and the last successor, without leaving any gaps[38].
2.4.6 How Declaration of Title to Land is decided
Civil casesincluding declaration of title to land are decided on balance of probabilities.Before a judge comes to a decision as to which evidence he accepts and whichevidence he rejects, he should first of all put the totality of the evidenceadduced by both parties on each side of the imaginary scale. He will thenassess which is heavier, not by the number of witnesses called by each partybut the quality or the probative value of the testimony of those witnesses[39].
2.4.7 Weakness of the Defendant’s Case
It is settled lawthat in an action for declaration of ownership to land, party claiming ownershipof the land must succeed on the strength of his case and not on the weakness ofthe other party's case. Where this onus is not discharged, the weakness of theother party's case will not help him and the proper judgment is for the otherparty[40].
To succeed in acase for declaration of title, a party must establish the method by which heacquired the said title; ownership of land cannot be claimed without firstestablishing that ownership[41].The Claimant must prove to the satisfaction of theCourt that he has a better title than the defendant[42].
2.4.8 Standard of Proof in Declaration of Title to Land
It has even beennoted that in a claim for a declaration of title to land the standard of proofby a Plaintiff is on a balance of probabilities[43].
2.5 RELEVANT STATUTORY AND REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS ON LAND IN NIGERIA
2.5.1 The following are the basic statutory and regulatory requirements thatare relevant in Court in land litigation:
a) The Contract of Sale of a Land orLanded Property must be in Writing:
It must, however, be pointed out that it isnot a prerequisite under the traditional laws, that sale of land shall beevidenced in writing. It suffices that the purchase price of the land is paidby the purchaser, and the purchaser must be let into possession by the vendorin the presence of witnesses[44].
b) An Unstamped Title Document cannotbe tendered in Court as Evidence.
It must beborne in mind that there are two categories of inadmissible evidence. Evidence that is absolutely inadmissible inlaw which is not within the competence of the parties to admit by consent orotherwise. It is a document which is by law inadmissible[45]
The second class of inadmissible evidence[46]is, for example, a document which is admissible in law but upon fulfillingcertain conditions, parties may by consent admit it notwithstanding theconditions not being fulfilled e.g. the admission of unstamped instrumentrequired to be stamped[47].
c) Certificate of Occupancy
Confers astatutory right of occupancy which overrides any counter claim to the landunless held otherwise by the court. A certificateof occupancy does not stop the court from enquiring into the validity orexistence of title of the person asserting possession before the issue of the certificate. Thus, in Ekpechi v.Owhonda[48], it was held that where a party woefully failed to prove his root oftitle, the statutory right of occupancy declared in his favour was withoutfoundation whatsoever and must be set aside.
The mere issuance or acquisition of a certificate ofoccupancy does not and cannot confer title in respect of a parcel of land itpurports to cover where no such title either existed or was available to betransferred.
It is clear from the provisions of section 34of the Land Use Act that any person without title to a parcel of land inrespect of which a certificate of occupancy is issued acquire no right orinterest which he did not have before the certificate[49].
A certificate of occupancy does not stop thecourt from enquiring into the validity or existence of title of the person assertingpossession before the issue of the certificate. This is the weakness acertificate of occupancy issued in such circumstances as it is never associatedwith title[50].
d) Governor’s Consent
Underthe Land Use Act, the consentof the Governor of a State must be obtained before any Assignment, Lease orMortgage of an interest in land in a State in Nigeria can be recognised asvalid in law.
e) Registrationof Title Documents with the Registrar of Title
Any document affecting land -except a Will - must be registered. An unregistered title document is notadmissible in Court as evidence of legal title except an equitable title.
f) Approval of Building Plans
Under the Lagos State Urban and Regional Planning and Development Law,[51] a building erected without a Planning Permit and Certificate of Completion and Fitness for Habitation may be demolished upon compliance with statutory condition precedents.
Legal Remedies for Threat to Right of Ownership or Enjoyment of Land
|
Sue for
Trespass to
Land
|
Where another without lawful justification or without your invitation or permission:
(a)Enters upon your land, or
(b) Remains upon your land, or
(c) Directly places or projects any material objects upon your land.
You can sue for trespass to your land.
|
Sue for
Recovery of
Possession
of Land
|
A person who has been in exclusive possession of land but was wrongly dispossessed is entitled to sue for recovery of possession. In Nigeria, a right of action for recovery of land is extinguished twelve years after the date on which the cause of action accrued.
|
Declaration of
Title to Land
|
Where there is a conflict in claim of ownership of a land, the Claimant with proof of title can sue for declaration of title i.e. for the court to pronounce the person who has proved his title to the land as the one with the exclusive right to the land.
|
Nominal Damages
|
Money claimed by or ordered to be paid to a person as compensation for trespassing on the Claimant’s land or infringing on the Claimant’s right of ownership.
|
Special
Damages
|
Compensation for financial loss suffered as a result of trespass.
|
Specific Performance
|
The court may order or compel the party who breached contract of sale of land to perform the contract by making a decree of specific performance.
|
Injunction
|
Perpetual injunction restraining the trespasser from further trespassing on the land
|
Compensation
|
You are entitled to claim for compensation for the compulsory acquisition by the Government of a land covered by a Certificate of Occupancy.
|
Will
|
If you are bothered about the fate of your landed property in case of death, contact a lawyer to prepare you a Will.
|
It is settled law that a Plaintiff can succeed on a claim for damages for trespass and injunction even where his claim for a declaration of title fails[52].
|
3.0 CONCLUSION
3.1 Owning a landed property generally in Nigeria could be out of thenecessity to have a permanent personal or family place of residence or abusiness decision to invest in landed properties or the prestige of beingcalled a landlord. The dream of having a permanent personal or family place ofresidence or of being a landlord or reaping the fruits of investment in landedproperty is being frustrated by some unscrupulous persons, estate agents, landvendors and real estate companies who are taking undue advantage of innocentprospective landed property purchasers, who eventually stand the risk of losing themoney paid for the property and not getting the property purportedly sold tothem.
3.2 The starting point of securing or recovering properties via litigationis to get a Lawyer sound in Nigerian land law and jurisprudence involved in theprocess of purchasing and documentation of land transactions, this is the groundworkthat will determine the winning or losing a land litigation.
3.3 On further illumination onhow to secure or recover a disputed landed property in Court in any State inNigeria, you advised to contact Akintunde Esan or Ase Olodumare Chambers. Akintunde Esan is a Litigation/Commercial Lawyer. He is the Managing Partner/ Principal Consultant at Ase Olodumare Chambers, based in Lagos, Nigeria.
LAND LAW: LAND LITIGATION IN NIGERIA is a legal illumination of AKINTUNDE ESAN known as The LEGAL ADVISER ONLINE. Akintunde Esan is the Managing Partner & Principal Consultant @ ASE OLODUMARE CHAMBERS (Legal Practitioners/Consultants & Chartered Mediators)
Click to also view:
[1] See the Supreme Court in Idundun v. Okumagba(1976) 9 - 10 S.C. p.227. Matanmi v.Dada (2013) 2 SCNJ 616 and Nruamah v. Ebuzoeme (2013) 1 SCNJ 128. Uwangwe &Anor v. Oshorunaiye & Ors (2014) LPELR-23704 (CA) Per ABIRIYI, J.C.A. (Pp.33-34, paras. C-A)
[2] (1976) 9- 10 S.C. p.227
[3] Dike and Ors v. Nzeka and Ors (supra) 12, paragraphs A -F.
[4] Obasi and Anor v. Onwuka and Ors (supra)
[5] Per Nweze, J.S.C. (Pp.15-17, Paras. A-B) Sogunro & Ors v.Yeku & Ors (2017)
[6] (2017)(P. 21, Paras. B-E)
LPELR
[7] (2004) 17NWLR (PT.902) 354, 381,
[8] SeeNruamah v. Ebuzoeme (2013) 1 SCNJ 128;
per Ekanem,J.C.A. (Pp. 19-20, Paras. E-A) Abo v.Aanyam
[9] Ilona vs. Idakwo (2003) 12 MJSC 35 at 54
[10] Thompson v Arowolo (2003) 7 NWLR (Pt. 818) p. 126 at208.
[11] Romaine v. Romaine (1992) 4 NWLR (Pt. 238) p. 650;Akinduro v. Alaya (2007) All FWLR (Pt. 381) p.1653 at 1665; Ngene v. Igbo(2000) 4 NWLR (Pt. 651) p.131; Lawson & Anor v. Ajibulu & Ors (1997) 6NWLR (Pt. 507) p. 14 and Okunowo v. Molajo All FWLR (Pt. 590) p.1386 at1396-1397. See also Ashiru v. Olukoya (2006) 11 NWLR (Pt. 990) p.1." PerTsammani, J.C.A. (Pp. 30-31, Paras. D-F) Oke v. Ogidi & Ors
[12] SeeFasoro v. Beyioku & Ors. (1988) 2 NWLR (Pt.76) 263." Per FABIYI,J.C.A. (P.39, Para.A) Popoola v. Balogun & Ors. (2006) LPELR-5420(CA)
[13]Buraimoh v. Bamgbose (1989) 3NWLR (Pt.109) Pg 352 at 367 Para.C – D, Per UwaisJSC.
[14] SeeFasoro v. Beyioku (1998) 2 NWLR (Pt. 76) 263; Adedeji v. Oloso [2007] 5N.W.L.R. (Pt. 1026) 133 at 178 Paras. D - E (SC) Per Mohammed JSC.
[16] (1985)2 NWLR (pt 7) 393
[17] Per Peter-Odili, J.C.A.(as she then was) (Pp. 21-22,paras. B-C) Adekanye v. Grand Services Ltd (2007) LPELR-4047(CA)
[18] SeeThomas v. Holder 12 WACA 78; Da Costa v. Ikomi (1968) 1 All NLR 394,
[19] See Udev. Nwara (1993) 2 NWLR (pt 277) 638; Obikoya & Sons Ltd v. Governor ofLagos State (1987) 1 NWLR (pt 50) 385.
[20] SeeAkinternwa v. Oladunjoye (2000) 4 SCNJ 149
[21] Section143 of Evidence Act, 2011.
[22] PerIbekwe, J.S.C. (P.13, Para.D) Sanya v. Johnson (1974) LPELR-3011(SC)
[23] Adamu v. Leedo Presidential Motel Ltd & Anor(2015) LPELR-25918(CA) Bamgbade v. Balogun (1994)1 NWLR (Pt 323) 718; Per Abiru, J.C.A.(P. 32, Paras. A-C)
[24] MTNNigeria Communications Ltd v. Emegano
(2016) LPELR-41090(CA) Per Agube, J.C.A. (Pp. 68-70,Paras. F-A)
[25] Wallisv. Hands (1893) 2 Ch.75
[26] PerAgbaje JSC. Ayinde v. Salawu (1989) 3NWLR (Pt.109) P. 297 at 316 Pars. C – E
[27] Carrena& Ors. v. Arowolo & Ors. (2008) LPELR-833(SC), Per Tabai, J.S.C. (P.19, Paras. B-E)
[28] Ekpan & Anor. v. Agunu Uyo & Ors. (1986)LPELR-1085(SC) Per Aniagolu, J.S.C. (P.39, Paras.A-C) Alhaji J. Aromire& 2 Ors. V. J. J. Awoyemi (1972) 1 All N.L.R. (Pt. 1) 101; Anthony OdunukweV. The Administrator- General, East Central State (1978) I SC. 25 At 32
[29] S. 16(2) (A), 17 & 21 of the Limitation Law CAP. L67 Laws of Lagos State.
[31] SeeBaruwa v. Ogunsola 4 WACA 159; Elias v. Omobare (1982) 5 S.C. 25; Awere v.Lasoju (1975) N.M.L.R. 100 and Sangosanya v. Salawu (1975) N.M.L.R. 27.
[32] Usungv. Nyong (2010)2 NWLR (Pt. 1177) 83 at 112, paras. A-B;. Kyari v. Alkali (2001)5SC (Pt.II) 192
[33] Oshodiv. Eyifunmi (2000) 7 SC (Pt.1)145
[34] see Kyanv. Alkali (2001) 11 NWLR (Pt. 724) 412; Odefeso v. Coker (1999) 1 NWLR (Pt.588) 654.
[35] Igwe v.Kalu (2002) 4 MJSC 99 AT 131 para. F.
[36] . PerUwaifo J.S.C. (P.48, paras. B-C) Olohunde & Anor V. Adeyoju (2000)LPELR-2586(SC)
[37] (2009) 6 NWLR (Pt. 1136) 36 at 59
[38] SeeFayemi V Awe (2009) 15 NWLR (Pt. 1164) 315 at 340." Per SANKEY, J.C.A.(Pp. 23-24, Paras. C-A) Falke v. Billiri Local Govt Council & Ors (2016)LPELR-40772(CA)
[39] .Mogaji v. Odofin (1978) 4 SC 91; Mogaji v. Cadbury (Nig) Ltd. (1985) 2 NWLR (pt.7)pg.393; Adeleke v. Asani (1994) 1 NWLR (Pt.322) pg.536; Okoko v. Dakolo (2006)14 NWLR (Pt.1000) pg.401; Elewuju v. Onisaadu (2000) 3 NWLR (Pt.647) pg.95; Momoh& Ors. v. Umoru & Ors. (2011) LPELR-8130(SC) Per Adekeye, J.S.C.(Pp.74-75, paras.F-B)
[40] Lawalvs Akande (2009) 2 NWLR (Pt.1126) 425, Chukwu Vs Amadi (2009) 3 NWLR (Pt.1127)56, Usung v. Nyong (2010) 2 NWLR (Pt.1177) 83, Ogunjemila vs Ajibade (2010) 11NWLR (Pt 1206) 559.
[41] FasoroVs Beyioku (1988) 2 NWLR (Pt.76) 263, Nwofor Vs Nwosu (1992) 9 NWLR (Pt.264)229, Oyeneyin v. Akinkugbe (2010) 4 NWLR (Pt.1184) 265.
[42] PerAbiru, J.C.A. (Pp. 28-29, Paras. B-E) Jagaba & Ors v. Umar (2016)LPELR-40466(CA)
[43] See thecases of Aderemi v Adedire 1960 N.M.L.R. 400 at 402. Kaiyaoja Vs Egunla (1974)12 SC 55, Abaye v. Ofili (1936) 1 NWLR (Pt.15) 134, Akintola Vs Solano (1986) 2NWLR (Pt.24) 298, Eyo Vs Onuoha (2011) 11 NWLR (Pt.1257) 1, Momoh Vs Umoru(2011) 15 NWLR (Pt.1270) 217,per Agbaje, J.S.C. (P. 24, para. A) Nwadike &Ors. V. Ibekwe & Ors. (1987) LPELR-2087(SC)
[44] PerOrji-Abadua, J.C.A. (Pp. 21-22, paras. C-C) Mustapha v. Abubakar & Anor.(2010) LPELR-4567(CA)
[45] SeeJames v. Mid Motors (1978) 11- 12 SC 31, Minister v. Azikiwe (1969) 1 All NLR49, Kale v. Coker (1982) 12 SC 252.
[46] It is also the law, in the latter case, where a partyfails to object to the admission of an inadmissible evidence, at the trial, hecannot be allowed to raise an objection at the appeal stage unless the evidencewas absolutely legally inadmissible see (1976) 9 - 10 SC 179
[47]See Etim v. Ekpe (1983) 1SCNLR 120, (1983) NSCC 86; Igbodim v. Obianke (1976) 9- 10 SC 179.
Shittu v. Fashawe (2005)LPELR-3058(SC)Per Musdapher, J.S.C. (Pp.19-20, Paras.G-E)
[48] (1998)3 NWLR (Pt. 543) 618 at 635; Per Mshelia, J.C.A. (P. 22, paras. E-F) Fajimi v.Suberu & ORS. (2012) LPELR-8005(CA)
[49] Kyari v Alkali (2001) SC (Pt 11) 192; Ogunleye v Oni(1990) 2 NWLR (Pt 135) 745.
[50] PerSalami, J.C.A. (Pp.12-13, Paras.G-C) Boye Industries Limited & Anor. v.Adisa Sowemimo (2009) LPELR-8858(CA)
[52] See Oluwiv. Emiola ( 1967) NMLR 339 at p. 340; Adegbete v. Ogunfaolu (1990) 4NWLR(Pt.146) 578 at p. 597A and Ojibah v. Ojibah (1991) 5 NWLR (Pt.191) 296 at p.314. Per Uwais, J.S.C. (P. 27, Paras. C-D) Osafile v. Odi (1994) LPELR-2784(SC)
