Introduction
Imagine using your life savings to buy a piece of land and experiencing the joy of owning property, only to wake up one day and receive a notice of revocation of your right of occupancy. Devastating, right? Unfortunately, many people are unaware of the legal requirements for a valid revocation notice and the options available to them. In this article, I will explain what a notice of revocation is, the legal requirements for its validity, its effects, and other key considerations. This knowledge will help you make informed decisions if you ever find yourself in such a situation.
.
Statutory Provisions on Notice of Revocation
Notice of revocation of the right of occupancy is a critical procedural requirement for validly extinguishing the right of occupancy under the Land Use Act.1 It represents the formal communication through which the governor’s decision to revoke occupancy rights is conveyed to the holder. The effectiveness, validity, and timing of revocation all hinge on proper notice being given to the affected party
Section 28(6) of the Land Use Act specifically addresses the notice requirement:
“The revocation of a right of occupancy shall be signified under the hand of a public officer duly authorised in that behalf by the Governor and notice thereof shall be given to the holder2.”
Section 28(7) further explains the effect of such notice:
“The title of the holder of a right of occupancy shall be extinguished on receipt by him of the notice given under subsection (6) of this section or on such later date as may be stated in the notice.”
These provisions clearly show that:
- The notice of revocation of right of occupancy must be signed by an authorized public officer
- The notice of revocation of right of occupancy must be given to the holder of right of occupancy
- The holder’s title is extinguished upon receipt of the notice or on a later specified date
Table Of Contents
- Introduction
- Statutory Provisions on Notice of Revocation
- Requirements for a Valid Notice of Revocation of Right of Occupancy
- Effect of the Notice of Revocation of Right of Occupancy
- Contesting a Notice of Revocation of Right of Occupancy
- Two Types of Revocation and Their Impact on Notice Requirements
- Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
- Can a notice of revocation of right of occupancy be challenged in Nigeria?
- What are the legal grounds for revoking a right of occupancy in Nigeria?
- What happens if a right of occupancy is revoked?
- How can a landowner protect their right of occupancy from revocation?
- Does the government pay compensation after revoking a right of occupancy?
- Conclusion
Requirements for a Valid Notice of Revocation of Right of Occupancy
1. Proper Authorization
To be valid, the notice of revocation of right of occupancy must be signed by a public officer duly authorised by the Governor. This requirement ensures that revocation cannot be carried out arbitrarily by any government official but only by those specifically designated by the Governor.
2. Content of the notice of revocation of right of occupancy
While the Act does not explicitly state what the notice should contain, judicial interpretation has established certain requirements:
In Obikoya & Sons Ltd v. Governor of Lagos State (1987), the Court of Appeal held that:
“Under the Land Use Act, the reason for revoking a person’s right of occupancy must be stated in the Notice of Revocation, notwithstanding that the Act does not expressly state that the specific ground of the revocation must be stated in the Notice.”
The court concluded that this requirement was “supported by justice and common sense,” even if not explicitly required by the Act. Therefore, a valid notice of revocation must clearly state the grounds upon which the revocation is based, whether it is for public purposes or due to breach of conditions.3. Service of notice of notice of revocation of right of occupancy
The notice must be properly served on the holder of the right of occupancy. In Nigerian Telecommunication Ltd. and 2 others v. Chief M.O. Ogunbiyi, the Court of Appeal emphasised that:
“It would be quite invidious to any substituted service as a proper service of notice of revocation when the residence and whereabouts of the holder are within the knowledge of the party serving the notice.3“
The court further stated that personal service is required when the holder’s whereabouts are known. For corporate entities, service should be made to the principal officer at the registered officer.4Effect of the Notice of Revocation of Right of Occupancy
Section 28(7) makes it clear that the holder’s title is automatically extinguished upon receipt of the notice or on a later date specified in the notice. This means:
- The extinguishment is automatic and does not require further action or judicial intervention
- The holder’s right of occupancy ceases to exist legally from the moment of receipt
- Continued occupation after receipt of notice becomes unlawful
As noted by Hon. Justice Umuezulike,
“It leaves to the holder no option, no opportunity for contesting the extinguishment of his right and no room for judicial relief. It is a most drastic and autocratic power ever invested in any public functionary in Nigeria.”5Contesting a Notice of Revocation of Right of Occupancy
Despite the automatic effect of a notice of revocation, judicial decisions have established limited grounds for challenging it:
- Improper Service: If the notice was not properly served on the holder, the revocation may be invalid. This principle of law was demonstrated in the case of Obikoya & Sons Ltd. v. Governor of Lagos State (1987) 1 N.W.L.R. (pt. 50), wherein the Court of Appeal held that the revocation of right of occupancy was unconstitutional, null, and void, and the lack of proper service was a key reason for this decision. According to the court, Section 28(6) of the Land Use Act requires that notice of revocation be given to the holder of the right of occupancy and for a company like the appellant (Obikoya & Sons Ltd.), personal service by a principal officer of the company at its registered office was required.
- Lack of Proper Authorisation: If the notice was not signed by a properly authorised officer, it may be challenged. According to Section 28(6) of the Land use Act, for any notice of revocation of right of occupancy to be valid, the notice shall be signified under the hand of a public officer duly authorized by the Governor. the use of the word’ SHALL’ in the said section shows that it is a mandatory requirment. Hence, a notice of revocation of right of occupancy not signified under the hand of a public officer with the authority of the Governor would be held to be invalid
- Failure to State Grounds: a notice that fails to state the grounds for revocation might be deemed invalid. In Obikoya & Sons Ltd. v. Governor of Lagos State (1987) 1 N.W.L.R. (pt. 50), in that case the reason for the notice of revocation was not stated on the notice. The notice only stated that it was made pursuant to the powers vested in the Governor by Section 28 of the Land Use Act.The Court held that the failure to state the specific public purpose in the notice of revocation rendered the revocation unconstitutional, null, and void
- Revocation for Improper Purpose: If revocation is ostensibly for public purpose but later discovered that it was actually for private benefit unrelated to the government, it might be a valid ground to challenge the notice of revocation of right of occupancy
Two Types of Revocation and Their Impact on Notice Requirements
The nature of revocation affects the notice requirements and subsequent procedures:
- Revocation as an Incidence of Tenure: When revocation occurs due to breach of conditions or unauthorised alienation, the notice should specify these breaches. No compensation is payable in this scenario.
- Revocation as an Incidence of Sovereign Power: When revocation is for public purposes, the notice must specify the public purpose. Compensation is payable for unexhausted improvements, and the holder should be given reasonable time to vacate after compensation is paid.6
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
Can a notice of revocation of right of occupancy be challenged in Nigeria?
Yes, a notice of revocation of right of occupancy in Nigeria can be challenged in court if it was not properly served, lacks proper authorization, fails to state valid grounds, or was issued for an improper purpose.
What are the legal grounds for revoking a right of occupancy in Nigeria?
Under the Land Use Act, a right of occupancy in Nigeria can be revoked for public interest, breach of terms, or non-payment of ground rent.
What happens if a right of occupancy is revoked?
Once a right of occupancy in Nigeria is revoked, the land reverts to the government, and compensation may be paid for unexhausted improvements, but not for the land itself.
How can a landowner protect their right of occupancy from revocation?
A landowner can protect their right of occupancy in Nigeria by ensuring compliance with lease terms, paying required fees, and challenging any wrongful revocation through legal action.
Does the government pay compensation after revoking a right of occupancy?
Yes, but only for unexhausted improvements (such as buildings or structures). Compensation is not paid for the land itself since land is vested in the government under the Land Use Act.
Conclusion
The notice of revocation serves as the formal mechanism through which the governor exercises the power to revoke rights of occupancy. Its peremptory and automatic nature underscores the extensive powers conferred on the Governor by the Land Use Act. While judicial decisions have introduced some procedural safeguards regarding the content and service of the notice, the fundamental effect remains the same: upon receipt of a valid notice, the holder’s right of occupancy is extinguished without further legal process.
This mechanism highlights the insecurity of tenure created by the Land Use Act and the shift from proprietary ownership to mere rights of occupancy that can be terminated through a simple administrative notice. The notice requirement, though seemingly procedural, fundamentally defines the precarious nature of land rights under the Act.If you have concerns about a notice of revocation or need clarity on your property rights, you can reach outvia WhatsAPP Or call- +2349045532566
Disclaimer
This article is for informational purposes without more and does not constitute legal. For personalized legal advice, kindly consult a qualified legal practitioner.
Footnote
- Land Use Act, Cap L5 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004, Section 28(6) and (7) ↩︎
- Land Use Act, Section 28(6).
↩︎ - Nigerian Telecommunication Ltd. and 2 others v. Chief M.O. Ogunbiyi (1992) 7 N.W.L.R. (pt. 255) p. 543, ↩︎
- Osho v. Foreign Finance Corp. (1991) 4 N.W.L.R. pt. 184, p. 157, ↩︎
- Hon. Justice I. A Umezulike, ABC of Contemporary Land Law in Nigeria, 207 ↩︎
- Hon. Justice Umezulike. ABC of Contemporary Land Law in Nigeriap.201 ↩︎
