Land Rights in Nigeria: Ownership, Occupancy, and the Legal Protection of Interests in Land

CONTRIBUTOR: OLUGBADE JOHNSON ABIOLA

Introduction

Land is a fundamental natural resource and the foundation of human settlement, economic activity and social organisation. In Nigeria, as in many African societies, its significance extends beyond commercial value. Land is closely connected to identity, ancestry, community and social existence. The Privy Council acknowledged the distinctive character of African land tenure in Amodu Tijani v Secretary, Southern Nigeria, observing that the concept of individual land ownership under English law was generally foreign to traditional African landholding systems, in which land interests were predominantly communal.^[1] Today, the Land Use Act 1978 primarily regulates landholding in Nigeria. The Act vests all land within the territory of each state, excluding land vested in the Federal Government or its agencies, in the Governor of that state. The Governor holds and administers the land in trust for the use and common benefit of all Nigerians.^[2]

This article examines the legal framework governing rights and interests in land under Nigerian law, particularly the Land Use Act 1978 and the judicial decisions that have shaped its interpretation and application. It considers the nature of land rights, the distinction between statutory and customary rights of occupancy, the ownership and transfer of land interests, and the legal mechanisms available for their protection and enforcement. It also examines the practical and legal challenges affecting land tenure in Nigeria.

The Land Use Act, 1978: Framework and Foundational Principles

The Land Use Act 1978 is the principal legislation governing land rights in Nigeria. Section 1 vests all land within the territory of each state of the Federation in the Governor of that state, who holds and administers it in trust for the use and common benefit of all Nigerians, subject to the provisions of the Act.^[3]

In Savannah Bank (Nigeria) Ltd v Ajilo, the Court of Appeal held that the principal objective of the Act was to harmonise the land tenure systems previously operating in Northern and Southern Nigeria. The Act abolished the absolute ownership of land formerly exercised by individuals, families and communities and vested all land within each state in the Governor.^[4]

This vesting provision substantially altered pre-existing landholding arrangements. It replaced absolute private ownership with a system under which individuals and communities hold rights of occupancy, while the Governor exercises ultimate control over land within the state.^[5]

Statutory and Customary Rights of Occupancy

The Land Use Act recognises statutory and customary rights of occupancy. A statutory right of occupancy arises from a grant by the Governor. By contrast, a customary right of occupancy includes both a right granted by a local government and the right of a person or community lawfully using or occupying land in accordance with customary law.^[6] Both statutory and customary rights of occupancy may arise from an actual or deemed grant. The Governor grants an actual statutory right of occupancy under section 5(1)(a) of the Act. In contrast, an actual customary right of occupancy is granted by a local government under section 6(1)(a).

A deemed statutory right of occupancy arises by operation of section 34(2), while a deemed customary right of occupancy arises under section 36(2). Accordingly, an actual grant results from an express allocation by the Governor or a local government, whereas a deemed grant arises automatically by operation of law in favour of a person whose existing interest or occupation is preserved under the Act.^[7]

Methods of Proving Title to Land in Nigeria

Nigerian law recognises five methods of proving title to land. In Idundun v Okumagba, the Supreme Court identified the following methods:^[8]

1. traditional evidence establishing a root of title traced to a common ancestor or first settler;
2. the production of valid documents of title, including government grants, conveyances and certificates of occupancy;
3. acts of ownership extending over a sufficient period and sufficiently numerous to justify the inference that the claimant is the true owner;
4. acts of long possession and enjoyment of the land; and
5. proof of possession of connected or adjacent land in circumstances that make it probable that the claimant also owns the land in dispute.^[9]

The Supreme Court reaffirmed these methods in Aigbobahi v Aifuwa.^[10] A claimant need not establish title through all five methods. Proof by any one of them may be sufficient, provided the evidence is credible and establishes a better title than that of the opposing party.

Where a claimant relies on traditional evidence as the foundation of the claim, the claimant must establish the traditional history supporting the asserted title. There is no further obligation to prove title through the other recognised methods once the traditional evidence sufficiently establishes ownership.

Revocation of Rights of Occupancy and Compensation

One of the most controversial features of the Land Use Act is the Governor’s power to revoke a right of occupancy for overriding public interest. Section 28(1) authorises the Governor to revoke a statutory right of occupancy on this ground.^[11] The Act also permits revocation where the holder breaches the terms and conditions governing the grant.^[12] The scope of these powers has continued to create tension between state control over land and landholders’ proprietary interests.

Where the Governor revokes a right of occupancy for overriding public interest, section 29(1) entitles the holder or occupier to compensation for the value of any unexhausted improvements on the land at the date of revocation.^[13] The Act, however, does not provide compensation for the land itself. Instead, section 29(3) limits compensation to qualifying improvements, including buildings, installations, crops and other developments on the land.^[14] This method of assessment has attracted considerable criticism, particularly in cases of compulsory acquisition. Because compensation excludes the market value of the land, the amount payable may bear little relation to the holder’s actual economic loss. The compensation framework therefore remains a major source of concern for landholders whose interests are revoked for public purposes.

Transfer and Alienation of Interests in Land

The Land Use Act and the general law governing conveyancing and property transactions regulate the transfer and alienation of interests in land in Nigeria. The holder of a right of occupancy must obtain the consent of the appropriate authority before alienating that interest by assignment, mortgage, transfer of possession, sublease or otherwise. The parties must also comply with all applicable requirements relating to the execution, stamping and registration of the instrument of transfer.

In Adedeji v Oloso, the Supreme Court distinguished between transfers under English law and customary law. The Court held that, under English law, a sale of land requires a duly executed deed of conveyance to transfer legal title. By contrast, a valid sale under customary law requires payment of the purchase price, the presence of witnesses, the handing over of the land and the purchaser’s assumption of possession.^[15]

A formal transfer of a legal interest in land must generally be documented in writing and completed by a deed executed by the parties.^[16] The transferee must also submit the prescribed application for the consent of the Governor or other appropriate authority and apply to register the instrument at the relevant land registry.^[17]

The parties must pay the applicable stamp duties, registration fees, consent fees and other statutory charges before the instrument can be registered. Registration gives public notice of the transaction and protects the transferee’s interest against competing claims. However, registration does not validate an otherwise defective instrument or confer title where the transferor had none.^[18]

Registration of Title and the Challenges of Land Documentation

The registration of land instruments is an important mechanism for protecting and enforcing land interests. Registration provides constructive notice of the interest recorded in an instrument, strengthens the holder’s position against subsequent competing claims and facilitates the enforcement of property rights. However, registration does not cure defects in the instrument or confer title where the person transferring the interest had none.

Despite the statutory framework governing land registration,^[19] several challenges continue to undermine effective title documentation in Nigeria. These include:

1. the failure of landholders to register their instruments of title;
2. the existence of multiple or conflicting instruments relating to the same parcel of land; and
3. the difficulty of integrating customary landholdings into the statutory registration system.

These problems create uncertainty in land transactions, encourage competing claims and increase the risk of fraud and protracted litigation.

Legal Remedies for the Protection of Land Rights

A person whose interest in land has been infringed may seek one or more of the following remedies:

1. Declaration of title: A claimant may seek a judicial declaration confirming their legal or beneficial interest in the land.
2. Trespass: A person in lawful possession may bring an action against anyone who unlawfully enters or interferes with the land.
3. Recovery of possession: A person wrongfully dispossessed of land may seek an order restoring possession.
4. Damages: The court may award damages for loss arising from trespass, unlawful occupation, destruction of property or other interference with land rights.
5. Injunctive relief: The court may grant an injunction restraining a threatened or continuing interference with the claimant’s interest in the land.

Conclusion

Nigeria’s land rights framework reflects the interaction of customary tenure, colonial legal principles and post-independence statutory reform. The Land Use Act 1978 remains the foundation of this framework. It vests land in each state in the Governor, regulates the grant, transfer and revocation of rights of occupancy, and establishes the principal mechanisms through which interests in land are acquired, documented and protected.

Although the Act sought to unify land administration and improve access to land, its implementation continues to present significant challenges. Complex consent and registration procedures, conflicting claims, inadequate documentation, compensation disputes and the uneasy relationship between customary tenure and statutory regulation often undermine the security of land rights. Effective reform must therefore simplify land administration, strengthen title registration, improve compensation standards and ensure that the exercise of governmental powers remains transparent and subject to legal safeguards.

Ultimately, the protection of land rights in Nigeria depends not only on the existence of statutory rights and judicial remedies but also on an efficient, accessible and reliable system of land administration.

Reference:

1. Amodu Tijani v Secretary, Southern Nigeria [1921] 2 AC 399, 404, per Viscount Haldane. ↑
2. Land Use Act, Cap L5, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004 (hereinafter “Land Use Act” or “the Act”). ↑
3. Land Use Act 1978, s 1. ↑
4. (1987) 2 NWLR (Pt. 57) 42 ↑
5. Nkwocha v Governor of Anambra (1984) 6 SC 362.State ↑
6. Dagaci of Dere v. Dagaci of Ebwa (2001) 7 NWLR (Pt. 712) 366 ↑
7. Kyari v. Alkali (2001) 11 NWLR (Pt. 724) 412 ↑
8. Idundun v Okumagba (1976) 9-10 SC 227 (SC). ↑
9. Ibid. See also Achiakpa v Nduka [2003] 7 NWLR (Pt. 820) 505 (SC). ↑
10. (2006) 6 NWLR (Pt. 976) 270 ↑
11. Land Use Act, s 28(1). ↑
12. Land Use Act, s 26. ↑
13. Land Use Act, s 29(1). ↑
14. Land Use Act, s 29(3). ↑
15. (2007) 5 NWLR (Pt. 1026) 133 ↑
16. DLA PIPER, ‘Effective transfer of ownership’ (2026) https://www.dlapiperrealworld.com/law/index.html?t=sale-and-purchase&s=transactional-process&q=effective-transfer-of-ownership&c=NG accessed 19 June, 2026. ↑
17. Ibid ↑
18. Ibid. ↑
19. Registration of Titles Law of Lagos State, Cap R4, Laws of Lagos State, 2015; Land Instruments Registration Law, applicable in various States. ↑