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