GAIDADO v. LAWAN (2024) LPELR-62724 (CA)
LAND LAW – CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY –
What is the legal status of a Certificate of Occupancy in proof of title to land
“The mere production of the Exhibit H, (Certificate of Occupancy – Customary) also serves to confere the rights inherent therein on the Respondent, as well as legitimacy on the exercise of the Power of Attorney by the PW2 – See the case of VINYLON FOOT WEAR INDUSTRY LTD VS. DABI (2021) LPELR – 56142 (CA) and OTUKPO VS. JOHN & ANOR (2012) LPELR – 25053 (SC) to the effect that, a Certificate of Occupancy is a prima facie evidence of title or possession of land it portends and the party who contests it and seeks to defeat it, must establish that it was improperly issued and/or that it is invalid.”
APPEAL – UNAPPEALED FINDING(S)/DECISION(S)
Effect of failure to appeal against the finding(s) of a Court
“By law, a finding and/or decision of the Court, not appealed against, remains valid, binding and conclusive – See WURBO & ANOR VS. AHMED (2024) LPELR – 61855 (CA): “The law remains settled, that a finding or ruling of a Court not appealed against remains binding and conclusive. See HASSAN VS. STATE (2021) LPELR – 56572 (CA); EMEKA VS. NWOSU & ORS. (2019) LPELR – 52790 (SC); NZE VS. ARIBE (2016) LPELR 40617 (CA); NNADIKE & ANOR. VS. NWACHUKWU (2019) LPELR – 48131 (SC); ABIODUN VS. STATE (2022) LPELR – 59889 (SC).”
CONVEYANCY LAW – POWER OF ATTORNEY –
Extent and purpose of a power of attorney
“A lawful Attorney has the power to commit the donor over the mandate specified in the power of attorney. Appellant cannot deny and/or repudiate the acts of his attorney (PW2) who acted on his (Appellant’s) behalf. See the case of OKOROAFOR VS. OWENI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL (2014) LPELR – 22847 on the definition and effect of power of attorney: In the case of GREGORY OBI UDE V. CLEMENT NWARA & ANOR (1993) LPELR 3289 the Supreme Court clearly defines POWER OF ATTORNEY Per Nnemeka Agu, JSC as follows: ” A Power of Attorney is a document, usually but not always necessarily under seal, whereby a person seised of an estate in land authorizes another person (the donee) who is called his attorney to do in the stead of the donor anything which the donor can do, lawfully usually clearly spelt out in the power of attorney. Such acts may extend from receiving and suing for rates and rents from, to giving seisin to third parties. It may be issued for valuable consideration or may be coupled with interest, in either case it is usually made to be irrevocable either absolutely or for a limited period (see SS. 8 and 9 of the Conveyancing Act of 1881 which is still applicable in the Rivers State under Section 15 of the High Court Law). A power of attorney merely warrants and authorizes the donee to do certain acts in the stead of the donor and so is not an instrument which confers, transfers, limits, charges or alienates any title to the donee: rather it could be a vehicle whereby these acts could be done by the donor for and in the name of the donor to a third party…. ” Per EKPE, JCA (Pp. 17-18, para C) See also CHIME & ORS VS. CHIME & ORS (2001) LPELR – 24858 (SC): “…A Power of Attorney is a document, and may be under seal, which authorises a person to act for another person as his agent. The person who donates the power is called the ‘donor’ while the person who donated is called the ‘donee’. The power conferred on the donee may be either general or special. It is inconceivable that given the circumstances described above the right of the donor over certain property will be subordinated to that of the donee by reason only that he has, as it were, made a delegation of such right to the latter. The better view is that so long as the donee has not exercised the power comprised in the power of attorney it is clearly open to the donor to exercise the same power. Therefore, where the donee has in fact exercised the power under the power of attorney the donor’s power in this regard expires.” Per WALI, JSC (Pp. 33-34, paras. D-B) Appellant did not tender the power of attorney donated to PW2 to help the Court to know the limits of the power of the Donee. Appellant cannot, therefore, disown the acts of his lawful attorney as presented by the Respondent, especially as Exhibits G and H appear to confirm the efficacy of the exercise of that power by the Attorney (PW2) on behalf of the Appellant.”
✍️ C.K. ANYANWU ESQ
(Lawyer of Promise)
C.C. ELELE, SAN & ASSOCIATES
3c Pound Road Extension, Aba,
Abia State.
08033372101