NIGERIAN LAW CLAZ

Learn the Law with M.P Daniel...

WELCOME TO NIGERIAN LAW CLAZ

LightBlog

UPDATES

13 Nov 2018

November 13, 2018

The Nature of Administrative Law



Administrative law is often thought as one of the two major divisions of law, that is to say public law, which is the law governing the state and the relationship between individuals and the state. This is a contract distinction to private law, which governs the relationship between individuals and private entities or bodies.
Public law can thus be divided into constitutional law which deals with fundamental institutions of the State and administrative law on the other hand which deals with the ways those institutions operate in private in practice and the legal limitations on their power.
Administrative law is thus, a branch of public law which is concerned with the composition, procedures, powers, duties, rights and liabilities of the various organs of government engaged in administering public policies. These policies have either been made down by the parliament in legislations or developed by the government and other authorities in the exercise of their executive powers.
Therefore, administrative law consists on the one hand, study of the institutions of constitutional law and on the other hand, the study of the rules that guide the functioning of such institutions.
Wade and Forsyth in their book ‘Administrative law’ posit that Administrative law is the law relating to the control of the exercise of the powers of government.

THE FUNCTIONS OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
Administrative law seems to enable the task of governance i.e. implementation of policies to be performed. Administrative agencies are created by law and equipped to implement public policies on behalf of the State and for the general interest of the citizens. Administrative law governs the  relationships between public agencies and also between local agencies with legal powers to perform its tasks. The legislature therefore enforces the means of control since an agency is not authorised to go outside the powers.
The granting of administrative powers to agencies of government may be subject to both express and implied requirements and condition as the duty to act in good faith and not to act corruptly and to observe the principles of fair hearing. Administrative law offers checks to administrative agencies in order to prevent abuse of power.

Notwithstanding, it is also the duty of administrative law to compel the performance of public duty and you offer remedies to aggrieved parties. Thus, Administrative law  Click to Save or and Print this article for free deals with both negative and positive signs of mal-administration.
0
v�o l�c No comments:
Labels:
November 13, 2018

Judicial Review of Administrative Actions



Judicial review of administrative actions is concerned with the control of administrative bodies and also inferior Courts by the Superior Court of Records. As noted by Sir William Wade, Judicial review is the exercise of the Court inherent powers to determine whether an action is lawful or not and to award appropriate reliefs.

Therefore, Judicial review is concerned with the Courts power over public authorities and not private individuals or organizations. It is important to note that the High Court is vested with supervising jurisdiction over the proceedings and decisions of the inferior courts and Tribunals as well as government bodies. In Judicial review, the Court is concerned with the legality and not the merits of proceedings, decisions or acts of the inferior courts, Tribunals or government bodies. It is concerned with whether the lay down procedures were followed by the administrative body or whether the rules and principles of natural justice-right to fair hearing were adhered to or whether the body exceeded its powers when it took its decisions.
 In the case of Governor of Oyo v Folayan (1995) NSCNJ 50, the Supreme Court held obiter the principles that should be borne in mind by the Court when exercising the power of Judicial review of administrative actions, they are:

1.    That Judicial review is not an appeal
2.    That the Court must not substitute its judgment for that of the body whose decisions are                          reviewed.
3.   That the correct focus is not upon the decision, but on the manner in which it was reached, that what matters is the legality and not the correctness of the decision. That the reviewing court is not concerned with the merit of the target activity.


The applicant of judicial must be able to satisfy the call of illegality, breach of proceedings, the violation of the right to fairing as well as the violation of the powers of the bodies (ultra vires) which renders the decision unsustainable. Note that an appeal attacks the merit of the decision reached by the administrative body while judicial review attacks the proceedings leading to the decision. Where an applicant of judicial review succeeds, the court may award any of the prerogative writs and orders such as the Order of Certiorari, Prohibition, Injunction, mandamus, Declaration of Rights and the writ of harbeas corpus etc.
Click to Save or and to Print this Article for free
0
v�o l�c No comments:
Labels:
November 13, 2018

Administrative Prerogative Writs and Orders



MANDAMUS
An order of mandamus is available to compel the performance of a public duty in which the person applying for mandamus has sufficiently interest. As noted by Edigbe JSC in Shitta-bey v Federal Public Service Commission (1981) 1 SC p. 80, the order of mandamus only issues to a person or Corporation inquiring him or them to do some particular thing therein specify which pertains to his or her office which is the nature of a public duty. The public duty in question must be imposed upon the person against whom the order is sought.

In the case of Lanyanju v Araoye (1959)4 FSC p.154 it was held by the court that the duty under customary law can also be enforced by order of mandamus. In the case of Shitta-bey v Federal Public Service Commission (Supra), where it was held that the order of mandamus was appropriate to compel the commission to reinstate the applicant into the Civil Service from which he was compulsorily retired.
It should be noted that an order of mandamus cannot be applied in situations of discretion or in situations where what is compelled of a party to do is impossible to do or that it will be the contravention of the law or where there is an alternative specific remedy at law which is not less convenient or beneficial.

However, it does appear in recent time that an order of mandamus may be issued to compel the exercise of discretion from public officers. See the case of Ulegede v Commissioner for agriculture, Benue State (1996)8 NWLR p.437

INJUNCTION
An injunction is an order of the court prohibiting a person or body from doing a specific thing. Injunction can either be preventive, prohibitive or compulsive. Thus injunction is an order which forbids or restrains the carrying out of some specific acts. It can also be issued against anybody be it a private entity, individual government or any public office or public authority.
The basic types of injunction are: interim injunction, interlocutory injunction and perpetual injunction.

OMBUDSMAN
An ombudsman is an independent and non partisan public agency that receives and investigates complaints from members of the public for administrative wrongs of public authorities. Its functions is to investigate complaints and seek a way of redressing the wrong tendered without recourse for adjudication.
Thus, ombudsman is an official body to which people may come with grievances against government administrative authorities for it to peacefully resolve the issue and obtain remedy for it.

DECLARATION OF RIGHTS
A declaration of right is also known as a declaratory judgement. This is the pronouncement made by the court of competent jurisdiction of the legal obligations and rights of the parties in a suit without making a consequential order. It is a pronouncement that one party is right and the other wrong. Whether or not reliefs are given after a declaratory judgement by  the court or not, it is binding. A citizen may feel aggrieved and may seek a declaration of his rights by the Court. See the case of Shitta-bey v Federal Public Service Commission.
The remedy of declaration of rights will apply  on the following grounds:
      a)    That the act of the public authority is invalid.
      b)   For a declaration of rights in the circumstance.
      c)    For reliefs and consequential orders that has the effect of enforcing the declaratory judgements or orders.
See the case of Shugaba v Minister of Internal Affairs (1981)2 NCLR p.459 and the case of Tai Solarin v Inspector General of Police (1993)6 NWLR pt 300 p. 4-6   

AWARD OF DAMAGES
Damages are injuries suffered by a person by reason of the breach of his rights by another person. The award of damages is more or less a monetary compensation which the courts order the defendant to explain to the plaintiff as reasonable compensation of the act of the defendant which caused injury to the plaintiff. Section 35 (6) CFRN provides that any person who is unlawfully detained or arrested shall be entitled to compensation and public apology from the appropriate body or person and in this section, the appropriate person means authority specify by law. See the case of Shugaba v Minister of Internal Affairs (supra) where the sum of N50, 000 was awarded to the plaintiff for assault and unlawful deportation and the violation of the plaintiff’s right to personal liberty.
An applicant may see the Court for two kinds of damages namely; Special damages and General damages. Special damages are that which the applicant must proof and plead. It cannot be presumed by the Court. General damages on the other hand are such that the Court presumes have resulted from the harm suffered by the plaintiff which the plaintiff did not specifically plead. It is awarded for injuries and loss that are incapable of monetary qualification. Example of such injuries include: battery, assault,  loss of liberty by means of detention etc. See the case of Dele Giwa v Inspector General of Police (unreported).

HARBEAS CORPUS
The writ of harbeas corpus is one of the prerogative ways by which the detention of a person by an executive authority may be challenged in the High Court is made for the issuance of harbeas corpus; the court orders the release of the person detained in custody. It is of constitutional importance, because it is the writ that secures and enforces the fundamental human rights contained in chapter four of the 1999 Nigerian Constitution. See the case of Agbaje v Commissioner of Police(1969) 1 NMLR. 176 at 180 where the Court of Appeal held that the writ of harbeas corpus is a prerogative process for securing the liberty of the subject by affording an effective means of immediate release and unlawful or unjustifiable detention, whether in prison custody or private custody.
Harbeas corpus is a review and not an appeal, which challenges the legality of a detention. It will apply where the detention is ultra vires the person or authority that ordered it. The power of the High Court to issue this writ is territorially limited to the area where the court exercises jurisdiction. The writ will therefore not issue from a High Court of one jurisdiction demanding compliance by the High Court of a different jurisdiction.

PROHIBITION AND CERTIORARI
These two reliefs are more or less, the opposite of the other and they are resulted to in order to control the various courts and statutory Tribunals.
In prohibition, applicant will be seeking to restrain the administrative body from carrying out an act which otherwise will be unlawful and illegal. Prohibition is concerned on what is to happen. Remedies are available against bodies having the powers to determine questions affecting rights of subjects.
While on the other hand, the order of Certiorari relates to acts which have already been concluded. Certiorari is employ to quash the decision of an inferior court during excess of jurisdiction.
There are four grounds on which an order of Certiorari and Prohibition may be granted, these are:
            a)      Lack of jurisdiction by adjudicating body.
            b)      Breach of the rules of natural justice.
            c)       Error of law on the face of record.

            d)      That the decision has been obtained by fraud or collusion.
Click to Save or and to Print this Article for free
1
v�o l�c 1 comment:
Labels:
November 13, 2018

The Rule of Law




The concept of “Rule of Law" is the building block on which the modern democratic society is founded. For the successful functioning of the polity it is imperative that there is enforcement of law and of all contracts based on law. Laws are made for the welfare of the people to maintain harmony between the conflicting forces in society. One of the prime objects of making laws is to maintain law and order in society and develop a peaceful environment for the progress of the people. The concept of Rule of Law plays an important role in this process.
The term “Rule of Law" is derived from the French phrase 'La Principe de Legality' (the principle of legality) which refers to a government based on principles of law and not of men. In a broader sense Rule of Law means that Law is supreme and is above every individual. No individual whether if he is rich, poor, rulers or ruled etc are above law and they should obey it. In a narrower sense the rule of law implies that government authority may only be exercised in accordance with the written laws, which were adopted through an established procedure. The principle of Rule of Law is intended to be a safeguard against arbitrary actions of the government authorities. The rule of law has been described as a “rare and protean principle of our political tradition". The rule of law centrally comprises “the values of regularity and restraint, embodied in the slogan of “‘a government of laws, not men’". The term Rule of Law does not provide any thing about how the laws are to be made, or anything specific like the Fundamental Rights or the Directive principles or equality etc. but it provides for two basic concepts that is Law must be obeyed by the people and that the law must be made in such a way that it is able to guide the behaviour of its subjects. Different legal theorists have different approaches towards the concept of Rule of Law. Some believe that the rule of law has purely formal characteristics, meaning that the law must be publicly declared, with prospective application, and possess the characteristics of generality, equality, and certainty, but there are no requirements with regard to the content of the law. While other legal theorists believe that the rule of law necessarily entails protection of individual rights. Within legal theory, these two approaches to the rule of law are seen as the two basic alternatives, respectively labelled the formal and substantive approaches.
ORIGIN OF THE CONCEPT OF RULE OF LAW
The concept of Rule of Law is very old. In the thirteenth century Bracton, a judge in the reign of Henry III in a way introduced the concept of Rule of Law without naming it as Rule of Law. He wrote:
"The king himself ought to be subject to God and the law, because law makes him king."
Edward Coke is said to be the originator of concept of Rule of Law when he said that the king must be under God and law and thus vindicated the supremacy of law over the pretensions of the executives. [5] In India, the concept of Rule of Law can be traced back to the Upanishad. It provides that Law is the King of Kings. It is more powerful and higher than the Kings and there is nothing higher than law. By its powers the weak shall prevail over the strong and justice shall triumph. But the credit for developing the concept of Rule of Law goes to Professor A.V. Dicey who in his classic book “Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution" published in the year 1885 tried developing the concept of Rule of Law. As per Dicey no man is punishable or can be lawfully made to suffer in body or goods except for a distinct breach of law established in the ordinary legal manner before the ordinary Courts of the land. This establishes the fact that law is absolutely supreme and it excludes the existence of arbitrariness in any form. According to Dicey where there is scope discretion there is room for arbitrariness. So Dicey held that every man, whatever is his rank or condition, is subject to the ordinary law of the realm and amenable to the jurisdiction of the ordinary tribunals.
DICEY'S THEORY of Rule of Law consists of three main principles:
1. Absence of Arbitrary Power or Supremacy of Law: As per Dicey Rule of law means the absolute supremacy of law and 'no man is punishable or can lawfully be made to suffer in body or goods except for a distinct breach of law established in the ordinary legal manner before the courts of the land. Diecy was of the view that all individuals whether if he is a common man or government authority are bound to obey the law. He is of the view that no man can be punished for anything else than a breach of law which is already established, and also that the alleged offence is required to be proved before the ordinary courts in accordance with ordinary procedure.
2. Equality before Law: As per Dicey Rule of law, in the second principle, means the equality of law or equal subjection of all classes of people to the ordinary law of the land which is administered by the ordinary law courts. In this sense rule of law conveys that no man is above the law. Even the Government Officials are under a duty to obey the same law and there can be no other special courts for dealing specifically with their matters.
3. Constitution is the result of the ordinary law of the land: As per Dicey, in many countries rights such as right to personal liberty, freedom, arrest etc are provided by the written Constitution of a Country. But in England these rights are a result of the judicial decisions that have arisen due to the conflict between the parties. The constitution is not the source but the consequence of the rights of the individuals.
But this principle of Dicey is not applicable in India as in India we consider the Constitution to be the basic ground work of laws from which all other laws are derived.
COMPONENTS OF RULE OF LAW
Rule of Law is a dynamic concept but it is somewhat difficult to define. Every person has its own way of defining rule of law some think it to be the supremacy of law; some think it to be the principles like clarity, universality, stability etc. Due to all these reasons certain ingredients of Rule of Law have been identified and all which need to exist for the concept of Rule of Law to survive.
  • Common ingredients of Rule of Law are:
  • a government bound by and ruled by law
  • equality before the law
  • the establishment of law and order;
  • the efficient and predictable application of justice; and
  • the protection of human rights.

RULE OF LAW IN MODERN SENSE
Today Dicey's theory of rule of law cannot be accepted in its totality. The modern concept of the rule of law is fairly wide and therefore sets up an ideal for any government to achieve. This concept was developed by the International Commission of Jurists. Known as Delhi Declaration, 1959 which was latter on confirmed at logos in 1961. According to this formulation-
"The rule of law implies that the functions of the government in a free society should be so exercised as to create conditions in which the dignity of man as an individual is upheld. This dignity requires not only the recognition of certain civil or political rights but also creation of certain political, social, economical, educational and cultural conditions which are essential to the full development of his personality".
According to Davis, there are seven principal meanings of the term “Rule of law: (1) law and order; (2) fixed rules; (3) elimination of discretion; (4) due process of law or fairness; (5) natural law or observance of the principles of natural justice; (6) preference for judges and ordinary courts of law to executive authorities and administrative tribunals; and (7) Judicial review of administrative actions. So finally it may correctly be said that rule of law does not mean and cannot mean any government under any law. It means the rule by a democratic law-a law which is passed in a democratically elected parliament after adequate debate and discussion. Likewise, Sir Ivor Jennings says -
"In proper sense rule of law implies a democratic system, a constitutional government where criticism of the government is not only permissible but also a positive merit and where parties based on competing politics or interests are not only allowed but encouraged. Where this exist the other consequences of rule of law must follow".



Click to Save or and to Print this Article for free
0
v�o l�c No comments:
Labels:
November 13, 2018

The Concept of Fixtures under the Nigerian Land Law



Fixtures in Land Law is a concept that relates to land-they are chattels affixed to the land. Hence, any attempt to go further on the subject-matter is a clear call to the doctrine of Quic Quid Plantatur Solo Solo Cedit. This is a common law doctrine which was received into the Nigerian Land Law. This doctrine receives a widespread of attention from jurists and legal scholars, especially under the Nigerian Legal System. The doctrine of Quic Quid Plantatur Solo Solo Cedit simply means that he who owns a land also owns that which is attached to the land; things attached to it above to the heaven and to the depth of the earth. It is for this reason we earlier submitted that the concept of fixtures is embedded in the above stated doctrine. Click on the link to read an article on the definition and nature of land law.

Fixtures may be defined as chattels which belong to the land; this may include anything that has become so attached to the land that forms part of the land. Fixtures in relation to land are chattels, because they are corporeal objects which may be moved from a point to another or be affixed to the building and may be detached at any time. For example, An Air Conditioner is a chattel (it is a moveable object) but it becomes a fixture as soon as it is annexed to a land or building.

The test usually adopted to inquire whether a chattel is capable of being referred to as a fixture to land is a question of law. The principle adopted overtime by the courts is dependent on the following ingredients:

 a) The Decree or Mode of Annexation.

 b) The Purpose or Intention of Annexation.

In the case of Holland v Hodgson (1817) L.R 7, Blackbun J. observed thus:
“There is no doubt that the general maxim of law is, that what is annexed to the land becomes part of the land, but it is very difficult, if not impossible to say with precision what constitutes annexation sufficient for this purpose. It is a question, which must depend on the circumstances of each case, as indicating intention, viz. the decree of annexation and the object of annexation.”

The Decree or Mode of Annexation: A chattel qualifies as a fixture if it is fastened to the land or building either by use of nails or screws or any object with which it may be used to fastened it to the wall. The chattel must be dependent on another object in annexing it to the building else it is only a chattel and not a fixture. “It must not merely stand on its weight or on the ground.” For example, a standing fan in a building does not qualify for a fixture, because it is standing on its weight, however, a ceiling fan annexed to the ceiling qualifies for a fixture, because it is not resting on its on weight.

The Purpose or Intention of Annexation: The principle of law as it relates to fixtures provides that a chattel becomes a fixture if it has been attached as a permanent improvement to the land or as part of the architectural design. We are of the opinion that where a tenant secures a floor to the building where he occupies during the period where a valid lease is in operation will be held to be a fixture. We refer you to the case of Vaudeville Electric Co. v Muriset (1920) 2 CH. 74.

In summary, on the expiration of a lease, all fixtures put to the land by the tenant without permission of the landlord, belong to the landlord and become known as landlord’s fixtures. The types of fixtures that may be removed by the tenants are: Trade Fixtures, Agricultural Fixtures and Ornamental or and Domestic Fixtures.
Click to Save or and to Print this Article for free
0
v�o l�c No comments:
Labels:
November 13, 2018

Understanding the Concept of Bail



The right of an accused person to 0btain bail is a constitutional right, which makes it an essential aspect of Criminal Procedure. The certainty of this assertion is centred on the provisions of section 35 and 36(5) respectively of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (As amended). To understand the extent of this constitutional, we must first attempt to define the termed Bail, this is because it is the constitutional right of every accused person to apply bail in Criminal proceedings. Blacks Law Dictionary defines the grant of bail as the lawful process where an accused is set at liberty - when arrested, charged to court or imprisoned on security being taken for his appearance on a day and place certain.

Authorities who may Grant Bail Application
The Police and Courts of Justice with competent jurisdiction are two recognised and obvious authorities that may grant bail application.

Police Bail
The power of the Police to grant bail is inferred from sections 17 of the Criminal Procedure Act, Section 129 of the Criminal Procedure Code and section 27 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Law Lagos. Section 27(b) of the Police Act is not also left out. By the provisions, the Police have the authority to grant bail pending the investigation of the alleged offence(s) against the accused person(s). This application is made in writing by either the accused or his surety. We must under that police bail is purely administration, hence the accused person is advised to apply fresh application for bail when arraignment or risk being remanded in prison custody pending his trial – Police bail abates on arraignment of the accused before a Court of Justice.

Court Bail
Court bail is that application which may be sought by the accused person through his counsel upon arraignment or during the course of trial or after judgment but pending appeal. The power of Court to grant bail may be inferred from provisions of the law: section 30 of the Criminal Procedure Act, section 57 of the Criminal Procedure and section 29 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Law Lagos.
The notorious fact we must not take any less is the fact that the power of a Court to grant bail is also centred on its criminal jurisdiction over  the offence(s) charged as well as the offender(s). The power of the Court to grant bail is also discretionary. This is why an accused person who applies bail through his counsel may bring necessary to support his application for bail in order to enable the court exercise its discretion. He refusal of a Court to grant bail to an accused person cannot be appealed against even on grounds of malice. It is advisable that where a Court refuses to grant the accused person bail, he may file fresh application for bail in a similar court or a higher court which has the original jurisdiction to try the offence.

Bail Application in Capital Offences
In capital offences, the High Court of Justice has power to grant bail applicant. However, granting bail in capital offences is seldom (rarely) obtainable, ‘except where there exists cogent and compelling reasons.’ In the case of Oladele v The State (1993) 1 NWLR (pt. 269) 294 at p. 308, the Court observed that: “it is unusual for a person accused of murder to be on bail pending trial, murder being a very serious offence, it is not in the interest of the public that a person charged with murder should be released on bail bail.”
Furthermore, the process of bail application in the North part of Nigeria in the High Court is usually by a process referred to as Motion on Notice usually accompanied with an affidavit.

Conditions for Bail
The following are considered conditions for bail to enable the court exercise its discretion:
a.      The applicant should satisfy reasonable grounds to believe that the accused person did not commit the alleged offence.
b.      The applicant should satisfy that if granted bail, proper investigation of the offence will not be prejudiced.
c.       The applicant should satisfy that if granted bail, he will not jump bail and will always avail himself for trial.
The under listed are other determining factors that the Courts into in order to draw an inference on whether or not to grant bail:
   i.             The gravity of the offence and severity of the punishment.
   ii.           The likelihood of the accused person committing an offence if admitted on bail.
   iii.          The criminal antecedents of the accused person.
  iv.   The health condition of the accused person and whether the prison custody have enabling health facilities to treat him.

Terms of Bail
Terms of bail are not necessarily the same as conditions for bail. The terms of bail simply means requirements the accused person needs to satisfy in order to be admitted on bail. The terms of bail are peculiar to the circumstance of each case.

a.      Bail on Self-recognizance: An accused person, suspect or convict may be granted bail on self-recognizance on the occasion he is not required to provide bonds or sureties for bail. This term is accepted on grounds that the accused person will always avail himself for trial on a set date, time and place to answer the charge or charges made against him. The type of bail term is not usually available, except where the offence charged is a minor offence and where the accused person is a reputable personality in the society.

b.      Bail on bond for fixed amount: An accused person, suspect or convict upon executing a bond for a fixed amount of money without surety that he will appear in Court or Police Station, on a specified time and date to answer allegations made against him. The accused person will be asked to pay the bond where he fails to appear in Court or Police Station on a specified time and date where his appearance is necessary.

c.       Bail on Bond with Surety: This type of bail term is a three-party undertaking involving the State, accused person and his surety. The accused person is released on bail by the State where the surety guarantees the appearance of the accused person on a specified time and date where the accused person’s appearance is deemed necessary in Court or at the Police Station. Section 122 of the Criminal Procedure Act provides thus:


“An accused admitted to bail may be required to produce such surety or sureties as, in the opinion of the Court admitting him on bail, will be sufficient to ensure his appearance as and when required and shall with him or them enter into a recognizance accordingly.”
Click to Save or and to Print this Article for free
0
v�o l�c No comments:
Labels:

12 Nov 2018

November 12, 2018

Definition and Nature of Nigerian Land Law



Definition and Nature of Nigerian Land Law
Land Law is enjoined to regulate the legal relationship of persons to corporeal properties, thereby providing a secure foundation for the acquisition, enjoyment and disposal of it - it describes and regulates the rights, interests and estates on land. It is therefore important to understand and define land, what it is and distinguish between land as a property and or right and other properties. Land is peculiar property because it is immovable unlike other properties, capable of being owned, it is transferable in its form, it is capable of being owned in different forms, it means that different interests may exist on land simultaneously and each interest is a right enforceable by each interest holder.   

The area of Land Law in Nigeria is a complex thing. No doubt it constitutes an area in Civil Litigation where disputes in land matters take a large part of civil suits in the courts. This disputes range from challenge of ownership, threat to possession (trespass) whether actionable under Customary Land Law or the Land Use Act. There is no doubt that we could suppose that the value attached to landed properties in Nigeria is directly traceable to the fact that supposed owners or possessors of it guide it with every possible security needed legally.

Land has been defined in the Interpretation Act (Cap 123 LFN 2004) as “including, any building and any other thing attached to the earth or permanently fastened to anything so attached, but does not include minerals”. Section 2 of the Property and Conveying Law of 1959 defines Land as “…land of any tenure, building or parts of buildings (whether the division is horizontal, vertical, or made in any other way, and other corporeal hereditament, also rent and an easement right, privilege of benefit in, over or derived from land, but not an undivided share in land.”

From the above definition of land as to what is obtainable under the Nigerian Land Law, it will amaze to observe that minerals is omitted from the definition of land notwithstanding literally speaking it forms part of the land. This could be a deliberate omission, since ownership of minerals is the exclusive right of the government; this exclusive right may be inferred from section 3(1) of the Minerals Act, Laws of the Federation 1990, Cap. 226.



Click here Save or and to Print this Article for free
1
v�o l�c 1 comment:
Labels: