Background
The claimant, Orbit Building Society Limited, filed a writ on 1997-12-04 (amended 2004-04-15) claiming, inter alia, a declaration of title and possession to Bendel Hotels, Auchi (4.037 hectares), loss of income, general and exemplary damages, and a perpetual injunction against four defendants: Globe Mark Limited; Alhaji Highbreed Aliru Momoh; the Technical Committee on Privatization and Commercialization (Edo State); and the Attorney-General (Edo State). The claimant alleged it purchased the hotel from Edo State Government for ₦2.1 million in 1996, received Certificate of Occupancy No. EDSR 12538 (1996-08-06), and undertook fence and renovation works which were later destroyed by agents of the 1st and 2nd defendants who then occupied the property. The 1st and 2nd defendants counter-claimed in 2003 for breach of contract, alleging a prior bid and payment in 1993. Trial spanned 2011–2014, with judgment delivered on 2016-02-05.
Issues
- Whether the claimant validly acquired title via public bid and Certificate of Occupancy.
- Whether the 1st and 2nd defendants’ entry constituted trespass.
- Whether the 1st and 2nd defendants could maintain a counter-claim against the 3rd and 4th defendants (capacity, privity, limitation).
- Whether public officer protection or limitation statutes barred the counter-claim.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that:
- Trespass is actionable by the person in de jure possession, not merely de facto occupation.
- Contract rights and obligations are enforceable only by parties or those in privity.
- Public Officers Protection Law does not shield contract-based causes of action and artificial bodies.
- Limitation statutes apply: six years for contract and tort; twelve years for land claims.
Court Findings
The court found on the balance of probabilities that:
- The claimant paid the non-refundable fee and validly bid, as evidenced by Exhibit M and Certificate of Occupancy Exhibit B.
- The sale was transparent and not surreptitious; no element of clandestine fraud was proven.
- After successful bid, the claimant lawfully entered and began renovating; the 1st and 2nd defendants, lacking title, forcibly evicted workers, destroyed works, and wrongfully occupied the land.
- The 1st and 2nd defendants’ own documents (Exhibits K1, K2) confirm their bid was rejected and their bank draft returned as a counter-offer too late.
- Their counter-claim against the 3rd and 4th defendants was statute-barred: the cause of action accrued in 1993–1996, but counter-claim filed in 2003 (contracts) and amended in 2013 (land), exceeding statutory limitation periods.
- The 1st and 2nd defendants, having no privity in the sale contract between claimant and government, lacked capacity to set aside or enforce that contract.
Conclusion
The court granted the claimant’s declarations of title and possession to Bendel Hotels, Auchi. It awarded ₦5 million general damages for trespass and ₦5 million exemplary damages for self-help eviction. A perpetual injunction was issued restraining all defendants from further trespass or interference. Special damages for loss of income and materials were dismissed for want of specific pleading. The counter-claim by the 1st and 2nd defendants was struck out as time-barred and for lack of contractual privity.
Significance
This decision clarifies key principles in Nigerian property and contract law: the distinction between de jure possession and mere occupation; the necessity of privity for contract enforcement; application of limitation periods to public bodies and contractual claims; and the inadmissibility of self-help in land disputes. It underscores courts’ willingness to award exemplary damages to deter forcible entries on private land.