PAN ASIAN AFRICAN CO. LIMITED V NATIONAL INSURANCE CORPORATION (NIG.) LTD - Legalpedia | The Complete Lawyer - Research | Productivity | Health

PAN ASIAN AFRICAN CO. LIMITED V NATIONAL INSURANCE CORPORATION (NIG.) LTD

ASUQUO ETIM V THE STATE
July 24, 2025
ASIMIYU AFOLABI V THE STATE
July 24, 2025
ASUQUO ETIM V THE STATE
July 24, 2025
ASIMIYU AFOLABI V THE STATE
July 24, 2025
Show all

PAN ASIAN AFRICAN CO. LIMITED V NATIONAL INSURANCE CORPORATION (NIG.) LTD

Legalpedia Citation: (1982) Legalpedia (SC) 01960

In the Supreme Court of Nigeria

Fri Sep 10, 1982

Suit Number: SC. 12/1982

CORAM


GEORGE S. SOWEMIMO, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

OLABODE RHODES-VIVOUR

ANIAGOLU JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

ANTHONY N. ANIAGOLU, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

MOHAMMED BELLO, CHIEF JUSTICE OF NIGERIA


PARTIES


PAN ASIAN AFRICAN CO. LIMITED APPELLANTS


RESPONDENTS


AREA(S) OF LAW



SUMMARY OF FACTS

The appellants were granted a tenancy (or lease) of a flat for residential purposes for a term of 3 years which was renewed for another 3 years. Upon its expiration, the appellants intended to enter into a new agreement before the conclusion of the new tenancy agreement, the landlord, Messrs. Island Properties Limited sold and transferred title to the property to the respondents.


HELD


Appeal was allowed.


ISSUES


1. Is the flat, the subject matter of the action giving rise to this appeal, an accommodation controlled by the provisions of the Rent Control and Recovery of Residential Premises Law 1976 No. 9 of 1976?

2. Are the appellants “tenants” within the definition of the meaning of the word in the Rent Control and Recovery of Residential Premises Law No. 9 1976?


RATIONES DECIDENDI


WHO IS A “TENANT”


“The position therefore is that at the time the respondents obtained the transfer of title to the property, the appellants were tenants lawfully in occupation of the premises within the meaning of the word tenant in the Rent Control and Recovery of Premises Law 1976.” Obaseki, JSC.,


GENERAL RULE OF ESTOPPEL IN TENANCY


“The general rule is that a tenant is estopped from denying his landlords title, and a landlord from denying his tenants.” Obaseki, JSC.


TENANT AT WILL – WHO IS


“Holding over with the consent of the landlord made the appellants tenants at will. This is well settled in law.” Obaseki, JSC.,


CASES CITED


1. Akinosho v. Enigbokan & Anor. (1955) 21 NLR 88

2. Sobamowo v. The Federal Trustee (1970) 1 All NLR 257.

3. Cooke v. Loxley (1792) 5 TR 4

4. Achorne v. Gomme (1824) 2 Bing 54


STATUTES REFERRED TO


Rent Control and Recovery of Residential Premises Law No. 9 of 1976

Magistrates Court Law Cap. 82


CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT

Comments are closed.