3PLR – AKPAN AWO V. COOKEY GAM
POLICY, PRACTICE AND PUBLISHING, LAW REPORTS 3PLR
[PDF copy of this judgment can be sent to your email for N300 only. Just order through lawnigeria@gmail.com and info@lawnigeria.com or text 07067102097]
AKPAN AWO
V.
COOKEY GAM
SUPREME COURT OF LAGOS COLONY
(FULL COURT)
25th April 1913
3PLR/1913/1 (SC-L)
CITATIONS
BEFORE THEIR LORDSHIPS:
OSBORNE C.J.
WEBBER
SPEED
MAIN ISSUES
LAND LAW/REAL ESTATE:- Ownership of land – Transfer of title – Claim to defeat same based on established principles of customary aw – Acquiescence – When court will deem it equitable to protect claim of party in possession of land
CUSTOMARY LAW:- Transfer of interest in land – When customary law as to alienation of land conflicts with equitable principles protecting person in possession of land – How treated
MAIN JUDGMENT
WEBBER, J.
This is an appeal from a judgment of the Divisional court of the Eastern Province, which we are asked to set aside firstly on the ground that it is against the weight of evidence; an secondly on the ground that it is contrary to the well known principles of native law as regards the transfer of land. As to the first ground, it is sufficient to say that in our opinion; there was ample evidence upon which the Court might have found as it did in fact find, and that this Court would be wholly unjustified in upsetting that finding.
As to the second ground, it is alleged that no such transfer of the land in dispute as the Court held to have taken Place was permissible according to the well known principles of native law.
As to this point, there is uncontradicted evidence that the Defendants have been in undisturbed possession of this land with the full knowledge and acquiescence of the Plaintiffs for a period of at least 21 years and this, despite the fact that so far back as 1894, they dealt with the land by allowing an European factory to be erected thereon, which is the very act which forms the basis of this claim.
Now by the Supreme Court Ordinance, the Court is empowered to administer and give effect to native law and custom especially in cases relating to the tenure of land, but subject to this reservation, that such law or custom is not repugnant to the principles of natural justice, equity and good conscience.
In our opinion, it would be wholly inequitable to deprive the Defendants of property of which they have held undisputed possession and in respect of which they have collected rents for so long a term of years with the knowledge and acquiescence of those who now dispute their title, even if it were as clear as it is upon the evidence doubtful that they entered into possession, contrary to the principles of native law. We do not decide this point in accordance with any provision of English law as to the limitation of actions, but simply on the grounds of equity, on the ground that the Court will not allow a party to call in aid principles of native law, and least of all principles, which, as in this case, were developed in and are applicable to a state of society lastly different from that now existing, merely for the purpose of bolstering up a stale claim.
The appeal will therefore be dismissed.
