Skip to case content
Case Digest

BENNETH CHUKS EZE V. WENCESLAUS KONSHONI AKERELE (2019)

Court of Appeal (Lagos Division)

Coram
  • S. Dauda Bage JCA (Presided and Read the Lead Judgment)
  • Abimbola Osarugue Obaseki-Adejumo JCA
  • Jamilu Yammama Tukur JCA
Parties

Appellant:

  • Benneth Chuks Eze

Respondent:

  • Wenceslaus Konshoni Akerele
Suit number
CA/L/1073/2013
Delivered on

Background

This case arose from an ownership dispute over a piece of farmland and piggery situated at Kilometer 28, Lagos/Abeokuta Expressway, Agege, Lagos. The appellant, Benneth Chuks Eze, claimed he owned the property and sought a court declaration of title, general damages for alleged trespass, and a perpetual injunction against further trespass. The respondent, Wenceslaus Konshoni Akerele, countered Eze's claims by admitting a deed of assignment and accompanying survey plan as evidence.

Issues

The central issues for determination were:

  1. Whether the trial court correctly admitted an unregistered deed of assignment and associated survey plan, breaching the provisions of the Land Instruments Registration Law of Lagos State.
  2. Whether the admission of certain documents was contrary to provisions of the Evidence Act, 2011.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that:

  1. An unregistered deed of assignment cannot be admitted as evidence in land title disputes. Per the Land Instruments Registration Law of Lagos State, registration is mandatory for instruments impacting land ownership.
  2. Documents, including public documents, must satisfy evidentiary standards, including certification, to be admissible in court.

Court Findings

Upon reviewing the proceedings, the Court of Appeal found that:

  1. The deed of assignment presented by the respondent was unregistered and thus inadmissible under section 15 of the Land Instruments Registration Law.
  2. The trial court correctly rejected objections regarding the solicitor’s letter (exhibit C), as its admissibility depended on the context rather than its authorship.
  3. The writ of summons and its attachments (exhibit D) were not certified as required by law, making their admission erroneous.

Conclusion

Ultimately, the appeal was allowed. The expungement of the unregistered deed and improperly certified documents from the trial court’s records was mandated, while emphasizing the retrial of the case on its merits.

Significance

This decision accentuates the critical role of complying with procedural requirements in land law, particularly concerning documentation and registration. It reaffirms the legal principle that unregistered land instruments are inadmissible in evidence, protecting the integrity of property transactions and ownership claims in Nigeria.

Counsel:

  • Uchena Moneke - For the Appellant
  • B. Adewole (with him, A. Adewole) - For the Respondent