B. A. LAWAL AND ORS. VS YOUNAN & ORS.
September 8, 2025DABIRI AND ORS VS CHIEF A. B. GBAJUMO
September 8, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (1961-05) Legalpedia 28419 (SC)
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria
Holden at Lagos
Thu May 4, 1961
Suit Number: FSC. 314/1960
CORAM
BRETT, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
UNSWORTH, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
BRETT, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
UNSWORTH, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
TAYLOR, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
OLABODE RENNER MADAM IBIDUN OLOWU THENRY IBITAYO OLOWU APPELLANTS
ALBERT BABATUNDE RENNER
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
ADMINISTRATION OF ESTATE LAW – ASSENT-REMOVAL OF TRUSTEES
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The appellants claimed they were not trustees because they had not (in their capacity as executors) assented to the property vesting in them as trustees. The 2nd appellant was removed as trustee on grounds of ill- health.
HELD
The court held that they were trustees irrespective of the signing of a formal instrument of assent and that the removal of the 2nd appellant was in the interest of the beneficiaries of the estate.
ISSUES
Whether the lower court was right when it treated the 1st and 2nd respondents and the appellants as trustees when they had not assented to the property vesting in them as trustees.
Whether the 2nd appellant was properly removed as trustees.
RATIONES DECIDENDI
WHEN AN ASSENT IS NOT NEEDED TO TRANSFER PROPERTY TO A TRUST OR EXECUTOR
A formal written assent (even if desirable, as appears from Re Yerburgh (1928) YIN 208) is not strictly necessary where the executors and trustees are the same persons and the legal estate is therefore already at home in its proper resting place. Per Unsworth F.J
WHEN AN ASSENT IS NOT NEEDED TO TRANSFER PROPERTY TO A TRUST OR EXECUTOR
‘A formal written assent (even if desirable, as appears from Re Yerburgh (1928) YIN 208) is not strictly necessary where the executors and trustees are the same persons and the legal estate is therefore already at home in its proper resting place.’ Per Unsworth F.J
REMOVAL OF TRUSTEES
‘In exercising so delicate a jurisdiction as that of removing trustees, …the main guide must be the welfare of the beneficiaries.’ Per Unsworth F.J
CASES CITED
Wise v. Whitburn (1924)1 Ch. 460
Re Peel, Woodcock v. Holdroyd (1899) WN 208 and Re Cowley (1901) 1 Ch. 38
Getterstedt v. Broers (1884) 9 App. Cas. 371
STATUTES REFERRED TO
The Administration of Estates Law (chapter 1 of the 1959 edition of the Laws of the Western Region).
The Land Transfer Act, 1897.
