A land dispute can arise when two or more people claim ownership of the same property, a buyer discovers that the seller did not have a valid title, family members disagree over family land, or a neighbour encroaches on another person’s property. In Nigeria, land disputes can be financially draining and emotionally stressful. They can prevent a property owner from developing land, collecting rent, selling a property, or enjoying peaceful possession. In serious cases, a dispute can lead to multiple court proceedings, substantial legal expenses and years of uncertainty. However, not every land dispute needs to proceed to a full trial. Depending on the nature of the disagreement, the parties may resolve it through negotiation, mediation, settlement, administrative clarification or court proceedings. The appropriate method depends on the nature of the dispute, the strength of the parties’ evidence, the urgency of the situation and the legal remedies required. This guide explains how to resolve a land dispute in Nigeria, the options available, the evidence required and when court action becomes necessary. What Is a Land Dispute? A land dispute is a disagreement concerning ownership, possession, boundaries, use, transfer or other legal interests in land. Common types of land disputes in Nigeria include: Ownership disputes: Two or more parties claim legal ownership of the same land. Boundary disputes: Neighbours disagree over the location or extent of their respective plots. Family land disputes: Family members disagree over ownership, inheritance, management or a sale of family property. Land sale disputes: A seller fails to transfer the promised interest, sells the same property more than once, or lacks authority to sell. Trespass and encroachment: Someone enters, occupies or develops land without lawful justification. Inheritance disputes: Beneficiaries disagree over land belonging to a deceased person’s estate. Title document disputes: Parties challenge the authenticity, validity or legal effect of title documents. Government acquisition disputes: A property owner disputes the status or consequences of government acquisition. Landlord and tenant disputes: Parties disagree over possession, lease terms or rights concerning the property. Mortgage and enforcement disputes: A borrower, lender or third party disputes rights over mortgaged property. Identifying the correct category is important because the appropriate remedy for a boundary dispute may differ significantly from the remedy for a fraudulent sale or competing claims to ownership. Step 1: Establish the Nature of the Dispute Before choosing a resolution method, determine precisely what the disagreement concerns. Ask the following questions: Who are the parties claiming an interest in the land? What specific rights does each party claim? What documents support each claim? How did each party acquire their alleged interest? Is the dispute about ownership, possession, boundaries or a contractual obligation? Is the land family property, government land, leased land or privately acquired property? Has the dispute already been taken to court? Is there a judgment, injunction or other court order affecting the property? For example, if two neighbours disagree about the location of a boundary, a survey investigation and negotiation may resolve the issue. However, if both parties claim ownership under conflicting title documents, a more extensive title investigation may be necessary, and litigation may ultimately be unavoidable. Step 2: Gather and Examine the Evidence A land dispute should be resolved on evidence, not merely on assertions that a person has owned or occupied the land for many years. The relevant evidence may include: Deed of Assignment or Deed of Conveyance; Certificate of Occupancy; Governor’s Consent, where applicable; survey plan; purchase receipts; allocation documents; previous title documents; family or community records; probate or letters of administration; correspondence between the parties; photographs of the land; evidence of possession and development; land registry search results; relevant government records; and court judgments or pending proceedings. A lawyer should examine the documents to determine whether they establish the interest being claimed and whether any competing interest has priority. The importance of the root of title A title document should not be considered in isolation. If a person claims ownership through a seller, the investigation may need to establish whether that seller actually had the interest purportedly transferred. In Idundun v Okumagba (1976) 9–10 SC 227, the Supreme Court identified five recognised methods of proving title to land: Traditional evidence. Production of documents of title. Acts of ownership extending over a sufficient period to warrant the inference of ownership. Acts of long possession and enjoyment of the land. Possession of connected or adjacent land in circumstances supporting an inference of ownership of the disputed land. The applicable method depends on the circumstances and the evidence. A claimant must properly establish the basis of the title asserted. A deed, standing alone, may be insufficient where the grantor’s own title is challenged and the root of title must be established. Step 3: Consider Negotiation Negotiation is often the simplest method of resolving a land dispute where the parties are willing to engage constructively. It involves direct discussions between the parties, usually with their lawyers or other representatives where appropriate. Negotiation may be suitable where: neighbours disagree over a boundary; family members disagree about the management of property; a seller and purchaser disagree over completion of a transaction; one party is willing to compensate another; the parties can agree on access, occupation or use; or a dispute arose from a misunderstanding that can be corrected. For example, two neighbours who disagree about the boundary between their plots may agree to appoint an independent surveyor, compare the survey findings with their documents and adopt a mutually acceptable boundary. Negotiation can save time and expense, but it should not be used to pressure a party into surrendering a valid legal interest. Put the agreement in writing Where negotiation produces a settlement, the agreement should clearly identify: the parties; the property concerned; the dispute being resolved; the obligations of each party; any payment or compensation; any transfer, surrender or recognition of rights; the timeline for performance; and the consequences of non-compliance. Where the settlement involves a transfer or other dealing in land, the relevant legal formalities must also
What to Do When Someone Sells You Land They Do Not Own
Buying land from someone who does not actually own it can turn what appeared to be a straightforward property investment into a serious legal and financial problem. The situation can arise in several ways. A person may deliberately sell another person’s land, a family member may purport to sell family property without the required authority, an agent may exceed the authority given to them, or a seller may have acquired documents that do not give them a valid title to the property. In some cases, the seller may have acted fraudulently. In others, the seller may genuinely believe that they own the property but have a defective title. Whatever the circumstances, the buyer should act quickly once the problem is discovered. A fundamental principle of Nigerian property law is that a person cannot generally transfer a better title than the person actually possesses. The principle is commonly expressed by the Latin maxim nemo dat quod non habet — no one can give what they do not have. The Supreme Court has applied this principle where a person purports to transfer land after having already divested himself of the relevant interest. The later purchaser cannot acquire from the same grantor an interest that the grantor no longer possesses. The important question, therefore, is what the buyer should do after discovering that the seller did not own the land. How Can Someone Sell Land They Do Not Own? There are several ways this can happen. A Person Deliberately Sells Another Person’s Land This is one of the most serious situations. A person may know that land belongs to someone else but nevertheless present themselves as the owner and collect money from an unsuspecting buyer. Where false representations are deliberately made to obtain money, the transaction can raise both civil and criminal issues. A Person Sells Land They Previously Sold to Someone Else A seller may sell the same property to Buyer A and subsequently sell it again to Buyer B. The second buyer does not automatically become a co-owner simply because the second transaction was documented. Where competing purchasers trace their claims to the same grantor, the question of priority and the validity of the competing transactions becomes critical. The Supreme Court has applied the principle that once a grantor has effectively divested himself of title, he has nothing left to convey to a subsequent purchaser. A Family Member Sells Family Land Without Proper Authority Family property creates another common source of disputes. A person may represent themselves as the owner of family land and sell it without having the authority required to bind the family. The fact that the person is a family member does not automatically establish that they have authority to sell the entire property. The buyer must investigate the nature of the family ownership and the authority of the person purporting to sell. An Agent Exceeds Their Authority A property may also be sold by someone acting as an agent. The existence of a Power of Attorney or agency relationship does not mean that the agent can automatically do anything with the property. The scope of the authority must be examined. For example, authority to negotiate or manage property does not necessarily mean authority to sell and transfer the property. The Seller Has Documents but No Valid Title Possession of documents does not automatically establish ownership. A person may possess a Deed of Assignment, survey plan, receipt, allocation document or even other apparently official documents without having a valid title capable of being transferred. This is why examining only the seller’s immediate document is not enough. The buyer must investigate the root of title and determine whether the seller actually acquired a valid interest. What Does the Law Say About a Seller Who Has No Title? The principle of nemo dat quod non habet is fundamental. A person cannot ordinarily transfer to another a proprietary interest that the person does not possess. For example, if A has no title to a parcel of land, A cannot simply create good title for B by signing a deed purporting to sell the land to B. Likewise, where A previously transferred the relevant interest to B, A cannot ordinarily recover the divested interest and transfer it again to C. The Supreme Court has repeatedly applied this principle in land disputes. However, the legal consequences of a particular transaction depend on its facts. Questions of priority, notice, registration, consent, estoppel, customary law and the nature of the respective interests can affect the outcome. That is why a buyer should have the particular transaction examined rather than assuming that every defective sale produces exactly the same legal result. Does the Buyer Automatically Lose the Land? Not necessarily. Discovering that the person who sold the property did not have good title does not mean that the buyer should simply abandon the property without investigating the circumstances. Several questions must first be answered. For example: Who actually owns the property? What interest did the seller purport to transfer? Did the seller have any interest at all? Was the seller an agent or representative? Was the property previously sold to another person? Did the true owner authorise the transaction? Did the true owner receive or retain any part of the purchase price? Was the buyer misled? Is the true owner willing to recognise or ratify the transaction? Has the buyer entered into possession? Has the buyer developed the property? Is there existing litigation? Are there criminal elements to the transaction? The answers can determine what remedies are available. What Should You Do Immediately After Discovering the Problem? The first step is to stop and preserve your position. Do not immediately confront the alleged true owner or make statements that could prejudice your legal position. Instead: 1. Stop Further Payments If the purchase price has not been fully paid, consider stopping further payment until the title problem has been investigated and your legal position is clear. Do not allow the seller to persuade you to complete