SYLVESTER JOHNSON MAYAKI V LAGOS CITY COUNCIL CARETAKER COMMITTEE
August 6, 2025ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE MID-WESTERN STATE VS CHIEF SAM ESI
August 6, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (1977) Legalpedia (SC) 19311
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria
Thu Apr 14, 1977
Suit Number: SC. 366/1975
CORAM
EMANUEL OBIOMA OGWUEGBU, JSC. JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT (Read the Leading Judgment)
OBASEKI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
JOHN INYANG OKORO JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL
PARTIES
THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF THE MID-WESTERN STATE APPELLANTS
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
This appeal was brought from the judgment of the high court, in favour of the plaintiff by which it was ordered that the purported transfer and vesting of Esi College, Warri to the Government of Mid-Western State of Nigeria by virtue of the Education Edict 1972 was invalid. And it was ordered that the Government of the Mid-Western State of Nigeria or anyone acting by authority or order of the said Government be restrained from interfering with the plaintiffs rights and interests in accordance with the powers conferred by Section 39(1) of the Education Edict. Not satisfied with this decision, the defendant appealed to the Supreme Court.
HELD
The appeal failed. The judgment of the High Court was affirmed.
ISSUES
The learned trial Judge erred in law in that part of his judgment where he held Any Edict which is inconsistent with any section of the Constitution not suspended by Decree No. 1 of 1966 can be attacked and declared invalid, because by implication such an Edict is inconsistent with Decree No. 1 of 1966, when the basis of the claim before him was the Constitution of the Federation.
That the court below had no jurisdiction to declare Part VIII particularly Sections 40(2), 41(1), 41(4) of the Education Edict, 1972 invalid.
RATIONES DECIDENDI
THE INTENTION OF THE WESTERN LEGISLATURE WHEN IT ENACTED THE PUBLIC LANDS ACQUISITION LAW
“The intention of the Western Legislature (i.e. the “Regional Parliament”) when it enacted the Public Lands Acquisition Law was that compensation to be made to an owner of land compulsorily acquired from him must accord with well settled principles upon which compensation in such circumstances is to be assessed.” Per IDIGBE, JSC.
COMPENSATION FOR A COMPULSORILY ACQUIRED LAND
“The Committee itself cannot consider any claims of the proprietor unless and until the claims have been submitted to it by the “appropriate authority” (who is a Government functionary) to whom the proprietor (whose property has been acquired under the Edict), must, under the provisions of Section 40 (3), first submit his claims for compensation.” Per IDIGBE, JSC.
COMPENSATION FOR A COMPULSORILY ACQUIRED LAND
“The owner of land compulsorily acquired is entitled to the market value of that land at the time the intention to acquire was made known to him.” Per IDIGBE, JSC.
CASES CITED
STATUTES REFERRED TO
