AFRICAN CONTINENTAL BANK LTD V CHIEF JAMES O. EDEWOR & ORS
July 10, 2025GANIYU GBADAMOSI VS THE STATE
July 10, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (1992-12) Legalpedia 05059 (SC)
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria
LAGOS
Fri Dec 18, 1992
Suit Number: SC.24/1991
CORAM
KAWU, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
WALI JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
KUTIGI JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
OGWUEGBU JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
MOHAMMED JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
EDIO EKRETSU
EVRU ONOROVWIE (for themselves and on behalf of UNUARO FAMILY of Uwheru)
APPELLANTS
MILLAR OYOBEBERE
CHIEF ONIVWEGHA AKOKINI
SIMON APHIRHEVWE
JOHN MARK EKEH
OMOKOSI AGOGOJOSE
OVBIGHOVBIRORO ITUGHU (for themselves and on behalf of OHORO Community of Uwheru)
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
DECLARATION OF TITLE TO LAND – EVIDENCE- TRESPASS – POSSESSION
SUMMARY OF FACTS
Both parties claimed defective title to the land in dispute, the appellant however established possession of the land before the respondents came into the land
HELD
The court held that the appellants were entitled to damages in trespass as claimed by them.
ISSUES
1. Whether the Court of Appeal was right in holding that the learned trial Judge had found that the acts of ownership and possession did not extend over sufficient length of time to warrant the inference of exclusive ownership and possession.
2. Whether the Court of Appeal was right in holding that the learned trial Judge had found that both parties in this case were in possession of the land in dispute.
3. Whether the Court of Appeal was right in holding that the claim or trespass in this case is dependent on the claim for declaration of title.
4. Whether the Court of Appeal was right in expunging from the record and rejecting the evidence led by the appellants concerning their planting of crops, such as banana and plantain, on the land in dispute.
5. Whether the Court of Appeal was justified in disturbing the specific findings of fact made in favour of the appellants as to their possession of the land in dispute.”
RATIONES DECIDENDI
TRESPASS TO LAND
‘It is trite law that trespass to land is actionable at the suit of the person in possession of the land.’ Per Ogwuegbu J.S.C
FAILURE OF A CLAIM FOR DECLARATION OF TITLE TO LAND
‘The failure of the claim for declaration of title to land does not necessarily defeat a claim for damages for trespass.’ Per Ogwuegbu J.S.C
CASES CITED
Akano v. Okunade (1978) 3 SC. 129 at 137;
Oluwa v. Eniola (1976) NML 339;
Kponulgo v. Kodadja 2 WA.C.A. 24
Amakor v. Obiefuna (1974)3 S.C 67 at 78
STATUTES REFERRED TO
None

