SOCIETE GENERALE FAVOURISER LE DEVELOPMENT DU COMMERCE ET DE L’INDUSTRIE EN FRANC V SOCIETE GENERALE BANK (NIG.) LTD
July 4, 2025CHIEF SAMUEL IKENNA & ANOR VS CHIEF BENEDICT BOSAH & ORS
July 4, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (1997) Legalpedia (SC) 06378
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria
HOLDEN AT ABUJA
Thu Apr 3, 1997
Suit Number: SC.25/1993
CORAM
A.B. WALI
OLAJIDE OLATAWURA., JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
U. MOHAMMED
A.I. IGUH
PARTIES
E. K. ISERU (Substituted by Doris Iseru) APPELLANTS
CATHOLIC BISHOP OF WARRI DIOCESS RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The respondent is the sole trustee and custodian of all the properties belonging to the Catholic Mission within the Warri Catholic Diocess. The land in dispute forms a portion of a parcel of land owned and possessed by the respondent either through a grant or by possessory right.
HELD
In the result, this appeal has failed. The judgment of the Court of Appeal in which it affirmed the decision of the trial High Court is hereby affirmed by me. The appeal is dismissed. I award N1000.00 costs in favour of the respondent.
ISSUES
1. Whether the appellant could be adjudged a trespasser when the respondent was not in exclusive possession of the land allegedly trespassed upon by the appellant 2. Whether the respondent could succeed in his claim against the appellant based on trespass to the land in dispute when the Mission was not in exclusive possession of the land in dispute.
RATIONES DECIDENDI
CONCURRENT FINDINGS OF FACT BY TWO LOWER COURTS
The rule of practice is that, in the absence of special circumstances, this court will not allow a question of fact to be re-opened where there have been two concurrent findings of fact by two lower courts.
TRESPASSER CAN MAINTAIN ACTION IN TRESSPASS
In a claim for trespass to land once the plaintiff is shown to be in possession, the defendant, in order to defeat plaintiff’s claim must show better title to the land. This is so since a trespasser or squatter can maintain an action in trespass against the whole world except the true owner or the one with a better title.
CASES CITED
Amakor v. Obiefuna (1974) 1 All NLR 119.Mogo Chinwendu v. Nwanegbo Mbamali (1980) 3 SC 31 Ukpe lbodo & Ors. v. Enarofia and Ors (1980) 5-7 SC 42 at 55.Akin Adejumo and 2 others v. Ajani Yusuf Ayantegbe (1989)All NLR. 468; (1989) 3 NWLR (Pt.110) 417.
STATUTES REFERRED TO
Not Available.|
