Relationship Between Locus Standi And Jurisdiction

Alhaji Mukhtar Ahmed

Mohammed

V

1.         Mouktar Mohammed

2.         Usman Dantata Jnr.

COURT OF APPEAL

(LAGOS DIVISION)

Ca/l/172/08

Helen Moronkeji Ogunwumiju, J.C.R. (Presided and Read the Leading Judgment)

John Inyang Okoro, J.C.A.

Rita Nosakhare Pemu, J.C.A.

Wednesday, 2nd December, 2011

Appeal – Court of Appeal – Power of under section 15 of Court of Appeal act.

Case Review – Idundum v. Okumagba (1976) 10 SC 227 – Purport of – Whether deals with ways of acquiring title to land

Commercial Law – Protection of property – Protection of commercial transactions – Principles governing

Contract – Consideration – Whether need be adequate.

Contract – Misrepresentation – What amounts to.

Contract – Misrepresentation – Types of – Respective effect thereof.

Contract – Written agreement – Interpretation of – Duty of court.

Contract – Contract for sale of land – Whether vendor of land can retract therefrom after receiving consideration

Contract – Disclosure of information – Obligation of contracting parties in respect of.

Contract – Performance of contract – When court will imply performance within reasonable time.

Contract – Privity of contract – Claim in respect of agreement – Whether can be made against party with whom there is no privity of contract.

Court – Court of Appeal – Power of under section 15 of Court of Appeal Act.

Court – Issues before the court – Issues raised by parties – Duty on court to limit itself therefore.

Document – Written agreement – Interpretation of – Duty on court

Document – Interpretation of document – Principles governing.

Equity – Laches and acquiescence – Successful plea of – Conditions therefor.

Equity – Notice – Types of.

Equity – Bona fide purchaser for value without notice – Principle of – Basis of.

Equity – Contract for sale of land – Whether vendor of land can retract therefrom after receiving consideration.

Equity – Interest in land – Equitable interest – Whether can be passed.

Equity – Interest in land – Receipt of purchase price and delivery of possession – Nature of interest conferred thereby.

Estoppel – Laches and acquiescence – Successful plea of – Conditions therefor.

Evidence – Admission – Fact admitted – How treated – Whether need be proved – Section 75, Evidence Act.

Land Law – Laches and acquiescence – Successful plea of – Conditions therefor.

Land Law – Notice – Types of.

Land Law – Protection of property – Protection of commercial transactions – Principles governing.

Land Law – Bona fide purchaser for value without notice – Principle of – Basis of.

Land Law – Contract for sale of land – Whether vendor of land can retract therefore after receiving consideration.

Land Law – Declaration of title to land – Identity of land in dispute – Need to describe land in dispute with certainty.

Land Law – Identity of land – When in issue.

Land Law – Interest in land – Equitable interest – Whether can be passed.

Land Law – Interest in land – Receipt of purchase price and delivery of possession – Nature of interest conferred therefore.

Land Law – Nemo dat quod non habet – Principle of Application of.

Land Law – Ownership of land – Idundun v. Okumagba (1976) 10 SC 227 – Purport of – Whether deals with ways of acquiring title to land.

Land Law – Title to land – Agreement which formalizes intention to convey title – Nature of – Whether registrable.

Practice And Procedure – Court of Appeal – Power of under section 15 of Court of Appeal Act.

Practice And Procedure – Issues before the court – issues raised by parties – Duty on court to limit itself thereof.

Principles of Interpretation – Interpretation of document – Principles governing.

Words And Phrases – ‘Barter” – Meaning of.

Issues:

1.Whether the trail court was right to have held that the agreement dated 28th November 1980 between the 1st and 2nd respondents is invalid and ineffectual.

2.Whether the trial court was right when it granted the 1st respondent’s claim for possession and declaration that he is the person entitled to the premises and certificate of occupancy covering property known as Plot C, Turnbull Road, now No. 1, Jabita Close, Ikoyi, Lagos.

3.Whether the trial court was right when it refused to grant the appellant’s counter-claim.

Facts:

The 1st respondent sued the 2nd respondent and the appellant, as the 1st and 2nd defendants respectively, at the High Court of Lagos State claiming a declaration that he is the person entitled to the certificate of occupancy dated 26th September 1979 registered as No. 24 at page 24 in Volume 1875 of the Lands Registry of Lagos State; a declaration that he is the person titled to all the premises known as Plot C, Turnbull Road (now No. 1 Jabita Close), Ikoyi, Lagos; and declaration that the contract between him and the 2nd respondent entered into on 28th November 1980 was no longer binding by reason of serious breach by the 2nd respondent and fraudulent misrepresentation. The 1st respondent also claimed an order rescinding the contract on the ground of fraudulent misrepresentation and breach of contract; possession of the said premises; general damages for breach of contract; and an order of perpetual injunction.

The 2nd respondent in response field an amended statement of defence and counter –claim wherein he claimed a declaration that the appellant is entitled to be registered as the owner of the property; and order directing the Registrar of Titles of Lagos State on being served with the order of the court to effect a change of title to the name of the appellant. Alternatively, the 2nd respondent claimed a declaration that the 1st respondent ought to execute a deed of assignment in respect of Plot C, Turnbulll Road, Ikoyi in favour of the appellant; and an order directing the Chief Registrar of the court to execute a deed of assignment in respect of Plot C, Turnbull Road, Ikoyi in favour of the appellant.

The appellant on his part also filed an amended statement of defence and counter-claim. He claimed an order directing the 1st respondent to execute a deed of assignment of the property in the name of the 2nd respondent or at his option in the name of the appellant as his nominee or, alternatively, if the 1st respondent refuses and/or neglects to execute the deed of assignment within 30 days of the date of the order of court, the Registrar of Title of Lagos Sate shall on being served with the order of the court effect a change of title to the name of the 1st respondent or at his option in the name of the appellant as his nominee. He also claimed an order directing both the 2nd respondent and one Counting Limited on receipt by the 2nd respondent of a sum of fifty thousand naira from the 1st respondent to execute a deed of assignment of the portion of a property at Sharada Industrial Estate, Kano covering two acres of factory and office buildings and two acres of virgin land out of the whole portion covered by Kano State certificate of occupancy No. LKN/IND/RC/82/111 in accordance with the agreement dated 28th November 1980 or, alternatively, if the 2nd respondent and/or the said Counting Limited refuses and/or neglects to execute the deed of assignment within thirty days of the date of the court order, the Registrar of Titles of Kano Sate shall on being served with the order of the court cause a survey to be made of the portion to be assigned at the cost of the 2nd respondent and Counting Limited and effect a change in the name of the 1st respondent or at his option in the name of his nominee, Dalfam Nigeria Limited.

On 28th November, 1980, the 1st and 2nd respondents entered into an agreement, exhibit “MM2”. By the agreement, the 1st respondent for a consideration of fifty thousand naira agreed to transfer his title to and ownership of a plot of land at Ikoyi to the 2nd respondent and the 2nd respondent in turn agreed to transfer his title to and ownership over a piece of land at Sharada, Kano State to the 1st respondent. In clauses 3 and 4 of the agreement, the parties further agreed that the deed of assignment in respect of the piece of land at Sharada, Kano shall be executed between Counting Limited from whom the 2nd respondent drew title and Dalfam Nigeria Limited in whose favour and on whose behalf the 1st respondent purchased the property. The deed of assignment in respect of the land at Ikoyi, Lagos belonging to the 1st respondent was to be executed between the 1st respondent and the 2nd respondent at such time as the 2nd respondent may so desire, although possession of the property may pass to him immediately. Thus, Counting Limited, a nominee of the 2nd respondent, was to execute the deed of assignment of the Sharada, Kano property to Dalfam Nigeria Limited, a nominee of the 1st respondent. The 2nd respondent undertook to pursue and obtain permission from the Kano State Ministry of Lands and Survey for the assignment of the land at Sharada, Kano.

The 2nd respondent paid the consideration of fifty thousand naira and immediately took possession of the Ikoyi, Lagos property. He then paid off the indebtedness of the 1st respondent in order to secure the title deeds from the bank. Thereafter, he took a loan to improve the property with the co-operation of the 1st respondent. Some years later, he sold the property to the appellant when he needed money to take care of himself after he was shot by armed robbers. However, due to the initial indifference, the parties neither passed legal estate or title to the other as stipulated in clauses 3 and 4 of exhibit ‘MM2’. Counting Limited got title by way of certificate of occupancy from the Kano Sate Government in 1986 vide exhibit “MM10.”

To be continued.