site logo
Skip to case content
Case Digest

UNION BANK PLC VS. AYO DARE & SONS LTD. (2000)

Court of Appeal, Abuja Division

Coram
  • Dahiru Musdapher, J.C.A.
  • Z. A. Bulkachuwa, J.C.A.
  • A. G. Oduyemi, J.C.A.
Parties

Appellant:

  • Union Bank Plc

Respondent:

  • Ayo Dare & Sons Ltd.
Suit number
CA/A/34/97
Delivered on

Background

This case arose from a dispute between Union Bank Plc and Ayo Dare & Sons Ltd regarding two deeds of legal mortgage executed as security for loans. The plaintiffs, Ayo Dare & Sons, challenged the validity of these deeds, asserting that the necessary consents for the transactions were not obtained in compliance with the Land Use Act of 1978.

Issues

The central issues addressed in the court were:

  1. Was the trial court correct in declaring the deeds of legal mortgage null and void?
  2. Did the Land Use Act's provisions regarding consent apply in the circumstances of this case?

Ratio Decidendi

The court unanimously dismissed the appeal on the grounds that:

  1. It is mandatory to obtain the consent of the appropriate authority before any alienation of a right of occupancy, including mortgages, as stipulated in Section 22 of the Land Use Act.
  2. The absence of proper consent led to the conclusion that the transactions were void under Section 26 of the same Act.

Court Findings

The Court of Appeal affirmed the findings of the trial court, which held that the deeds were null and void because they had not been executed in accordance with the provisions of the Land Use Act. The consents obtained were deemed insufficient as they were signed by individuals who lacked the authority as stipulated by law.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the appeal was dismissed, and the court upheld the trial judge’s ruling. The court emphasized the importance of adhering to statutory consent requirements when dealing with land transactions to avoid legal disputes.

Significance

This case highlights the critical implications of the Land Use Act regarding land transactions in Nigeria. It reinforces the requirement for obtaining proper consents and illustrates the judiciary's position on enforcing compliance with statutory regulations in real estate dealings. The case serves as a significant reference for future land law disputes and the necessity of due diligence in property transactions.

Counsel

Counsel:

  • Chief A. S. Awomolo, SAN
  • A. A. Izinyon, SAN