KIU Journal of Humanities

KIU Journal of Humanities Copyright©2017 Kampala International University ISSN: 2415-0843; 2(2A): 261–269

Analysis of the Rising Profile of Equitable Interests and their Application to Transfer of Interests in Land under Nigeria Land

SOLOMON O. AFOLABI University of Ilorin, Nigeria.

Abstract. Equitable interests in are instruments that validly convey interests in land generally viewed as of lower value, particularly in Nigeria. when they are in competition with legal interests. Generally, equitable interests are 1. Introduction considered as minor interests, largely unwritten and if written have failed to comply with all the Property is capable of sustaining a wide range of necessary requirements and therefore are interests and rights. Traditionally, property vulnerable and may be lost upon sale of the land rights were distinguished from personal rights. to a new purchaser. However, the above view of Property rights arose in relation to land and equitable interests has undergone tremendous personal rights in relation to every other “thing” changes. Given the contributions of in not being land. An interest in property is a validating most transactions which would have comprehensive term to describe any right, claim been otherwise invalid by strict application of or privilege that an individual has toward real or the law, equitable rights have advanced almost . It is all or part of a legal or to the of legal rights. This paper discusses equitable claim to or right in property. In other the distinction between equitable interests and words, while interest in property could be legal interests in property and analyses the referred to as right, claim or , such interest modern enhanced status of equitable interests. can either be “legal” or “equitable”. This paper also examines the application of the The distinction between legal interests and enhanced status of equitable interests to transfer equitable interests in property has been of of interests in land in Nigeria. Given the tremendous concern to legal studies since the enhanced status of equitable interests in property medieval period when the began to and its application to property transactions in develop. The attempts by the Lord Nigeria as demonstrated in this paper, it can be and later by equity to remedy the asserted that equitable interests in property have hardships occasioned by the strict application of transcended the minor interests they were in the legal rules culminated in the growth of equity traditional view as they have now almost that led to an open confrontation between attained the status of legal estates. Thus, the common law and equity. This led to the dichotomy between legal interests and equitable enactment of the of 1873 and interests has lost much significance. The paper 1875. The Acts fused the administration of the therefore recommends that some statutory two systems, providing inter alia, that in all provisions which exclude equitable interests cases where the rules of common law and the from the definition of “conveyance” should be rules of equity were in conflict, the rules of amended to include equitable interests as Equity were to prevail. Many scholars have noted that the Acts may have fused the two

261

KIU Journal of Humanities systems; they have not fused the rules and individual by law. It is always derivable from a principles of law and equity. In other words, the legal instrument which must have been created Judicature Acts notwithstanding there exists a according to laid down formalities. It is a right clear distinction between legal rights and historically recognized by common law . equitable rights. An on the other hand, is in Nigeria is governed by simply a right or interest in property conferred , , , common by equity. They are specie of rights over law and equity. Customary law refers to the property not known to common law. They were various customary that have governed recognized and enforced by the court of Nigerian communities since the pre-colonial era. chancery administering equitable . Common law was bequeathed to Nigeria by the Equitable interest operates to protect a party British colonial authorities who introduced the damnified by a strict application of legal rules, common law of England and the doctrines of particularly when there is a failure to comply equity as in the country. Common with legal formalities. When the application of law and equity have remained sources of law in legal rules will work hardship or lead to the country in the post-colonial era and have absurdities, equity will intervene to prevent greatly influenced land law in the country. injustice from being done to either of the parties. Equitable rights and interests are proprietary The general distinction is that a legal or rights in real property introduced into Nigeria interest is valid against all the world (it is under the doctrines of equity. usually expressed as right in rem) and any The problem associated with equitable interests person who subsequently acquires a legal or generally is the quantum of value to be attached equitable interest in the same property takes his to them in a competition with legal interests in a interest subject to the prior legal interest whether given property. Generally, equitable interests are he has notice of that interest or not. A legal viewed as minor interests, largely unwritten or if estate in property is enforceable against the written, have failed to comply with all the whole world. An equitable interest in property is necessary requirements and therefore are enforceable against the whole world except a vulnerable and may be lost upon sale of the land purchaser for value of the legal estate in the to a new purchaser. For this reason, equitable property in question, provided that, when the interests are generally omitted from the purchaser acquired the legal estate, he had no definitions of “conveyance” in property laws in notice either actual, constructive or imputed of Nigeria. The paper argues that notwithstanding the equitable interest. An equitable interest is the traditional view of equitable interests, said to be a right in personam, that is, equitable interests have grown beyond mere enforceable only against specified persons. rights in personam as they are now as powerful as legal rights in certain circumstances. In 3. The Modern Status of Equitable achieving this objective, the paper discusses the Interests in Property distinction between equitable interests and legal interests in property and analyses the modern Under the common law, certain formalities had enhanced status of equitable interests. The paper to be observed in order to create or transfer legal also examines the application of the enhanced interest in property and when these formalities status of equitable interests to transfer of are not completed no legal interest vests in the interests in land in Nigeria. The paper ends with purchaser. It is in all these areas of imperfection the conclusions and recommendation of the in the legal formalities that equity came in and research. filled the gap in the law. However, the traditional view was that an equitable interest 2. Distinguishing Equitable Interests was never as strong as a legal interest because an from Legal Interests equitable owner never had absolutely indefeasible title. This position was fortified by A legal right or interest can be defined as the the maxim “Equity acts in personam” which right or title in property conferred on an underlies the fabric of early equity jurisdiction

262

KIU Journal of Humanities as equitable rights are only enforceable against regarding the role equitable interests have the conscience of specified persons. This meant played in validating transactions which are that equitable rights and interests are in otherwise imperfect because they fail to comply personam and that equitable bind the with required legal formalities and in the person to obedience on pains of imprisonment creation of new rights in . In addition, but the does not operate on the subject this growing profile is noticeable in the judicial matter of the dispute. decisions relating to transfers of interests in land under native law and custom and in obtaining However, the above traditional view of equitable Governor’s consent to alienation of interests in interests has undergone tremendous changes. land under the Land Use Act. Given the contributions of equity in validating most transactions which would have been 5. Validation of Transactions that have otherwise invalid by strict application of the law, Incomplete Legal Formalities equitable rights have advanced almost to the status of legal rights. For this reason, Hanbury, Equitable interests have made possible the one of the leading equity scholars writing in the enforcement of certain transactions in land early part of the last century argued that the which would have been otherwise invalid traditional status of equitable rights has changed because they fail to comply with legal and that “Equitable rights and interests must … formalities. These categories of transaction are be regarded as hybrids, standing midway enforceable on the basis that “equity treats as between iura in personam and iura in rem”. done that which ought to be done”. Where this More recently, another learned scholar, Jill happens equity will decree Martin expressed the view that the status of for the enforcement of the terms of the . equitable interests in property have advanced Accordingly, it was held in Eriosho v. further than their traditional status. She argues Owokoniran & Ors that a sale of land which is that for example, “equitable interests under imperfect because the legal formalities have not trusts are equitable proprietary interest been complied with may give rise to an corresponding to legal estates, and the equitable interest in the property if there is beneficiary can properly be regarded as the that the purchaser buys the land and owner of the beneficial interest and the goes into possession. This decision affirmed the ownership is a right in rem”. rule in Walsh v. Lonsdale that states that where The modern view of equitable interests is a lease has not been made under a as fortified by other developments in the role of required by law, equity will enforce the written equitable interests in property transactions. For agreement for the lease as if the agreement had example, equitable interests have evolved to the been under deed. Recently, in Opara v. Dowel extent that they can now defeat the purchaser of Schlumberger (Nig) Ltd., the legal estate in certain circumstances. In again affirmed the principles of Walsh v. addition, equity interests have evolved new Lonsdale by holding that an agreement for a rights in property hitherto unknown to common lease is as good as a legal lease though the law. The next section hereunder will agreement confers only an equitable interest in demonstrate that the courts in Nigeria have the property. However, the equitable interest accepted this enhanced status of equitable which the intended lessee has under an interests. agreement for a lease does not exist in vacuo, but arises because the lessee has an equitable 4. Application of the Enhanced Status of right to specific performance of the agreement. Equitable Interests in Property In such a case, that which is agreed to be done Transactions in Nigeria and ought to be done is treated as having been done and carrying with it in equity the attendant The growing profile of equitable interests is rights. discernable from the decisions of Nigerian It is clear from the above that equitable interests courts relating to property interests especially were created through the act of part performance

263

KIU Journal of Humanities of one of the parties to the transaction thereby 6.2 Equitable Mortgage making it inequitable for the party who had benefited from the act of part performance to An equitable mortgage is an agreement to create resile from the contract on the account that the a legal mortgage. It is a contract which operates transaction failed to comply with legal as security and is enforceable under the formalities. equitable jurisdiction of the courts. It is treated in equity as an express or implied agreement to 6. Creation of New Rights in Property create a legal mortgage, which is supported by valuable and for which specific Equitable interests have brought about the performance may be decreed. This is in creation of certain rights in property which have accordance with the maxim that “equity regards no legal equivalents. Such rights include estate as done that which ought to be done”, for it is contract, equitable mortgage, and mortgagor’s treated as a present, immediately existing equity of redemption. security in equity. An equitable mortgage is express when created by an agreement, usually a 6.1 Estate Contract written memorandum, in which the mortgagor An estate contract arises where there is a valid undertakes to execute a legal mortgage contract to convey a plot of land; the purchaser whenever called upon to do so by the mortgagee. is at once considered as having an equitable It is implied, when it is constituted by a deposit interest in the property and it does not matter of tile with the intention to create a that the date for completion, when the purchaser security (whether or not accompanied by a may pay the purchase price and take possession, written memorandum). In this case, equity has not yet arrived, Equity, treating that as done implies an agreement to give and the right of the which ought to be done, will decree specific mortgagee to call for a legal mortgage. It can be performance for the enforcement of the terms of safely concluded that the act of depositing the the contract. A contract of sale of land or interest mortgagor’s title deeds constitute an act of part in land is a standard contract which contains not performance of an agreement which remove the just the basic requirements of the parties, transaction from the provision of the of property, the price and the nature of the interest . to be granted, but goes further to include detailed terms of what the parties have agreed to 6.3 Equity of Redemption such as the capacity in which the parties are contracting, payment of deposit, payment of the The legal estate in the mortgaged property balance of the purchase price, interest on remains in the mortgagor at all times during the balance, date and place of completion insurance subsistence of the mortgage. Under the common of the property and other terms which the parties law, the mortgagor’s right to redeem the may agree upon. It has been held that a contract mortgaged property is lost once he is unable to of sale of land create an equitable interest in the pay on the contractual date for payment. land. In Kachala v. Banki, the appellant had However, equity gives a right of redemption purchased a house in Maiduguri Borno State, but even after the contractual date for payment had for some reasons, he was frustrated from passed. This equity of redemption arises as soon registering the property. was later as the date to redeem the mortgage has passed. obtained against the appellant in a matter Equity of redemption has been defined as: unrelated to the purchase of the house and the the right of the mortgagor to recover the house was attached and sold to satisfy the security by discharging his obligations under the judgment debt which the respondents bought. mortgage although the time fixed by the contract The Court of Appeal held that the equitable for the performance of those obligation has interest in the property still resided with the passed, and even though under the express terms appellant and the subsequent sale of the property of his agreement, the security may be stated to had not divested him of this equitable interest. be the absolute property of the mortgagee.

264

KIU Journal of Humanities

This right to redeem is so inseparable an and usually accompanied with a ceremony. The incident of mortgage that it cannot be taken purchaser must take physical possession and away by an express agreement of the parties that remain in continuous possession thereof. A the mortgage is not to be redeemable or that the person who is first in time under Native law and right is to be confined to a particular time or a Custom but fail to evidence of continuous particular description of persons. Ogundare JSC occupation may lose priority to a subsequent in Ejikeme v. Okonkwo stated that: “this right buyer of the same land who was let into continues unless and until the mortgagor’s title possession immediately after the purchase and is extinguished or his interest is destroyed by the who continued to remain in occupation. sale either under the process of court or of a power in the mortgage incident to the security”. 7.2 Equitable Interests and Purchasers of The equity of redemption is also transferable. Legal Estate In order to make equitable interests effective, 7. Transfer of Interests in Land under equity aimed at eliminating the purchaser of Native Law and Custom legal estate without notice which has been a menace to its existence. The fact that a purchaser Equitable interests have been invoked with had the legal estate conveyed to him is not regard to alienation of land, purchasers of legal sufficient to make his interest superior to the estate, and customary pledge in transfer of already existing equitable interest. Once an interests under customary law. equitable interest is created in property and the equitable owner continue to be in possession of 7.1 Alienation of Land the property, the equitable interest cannot be Unlike under the , where it is defeated by subsequent legal interest even if required that transactions relating to transfer of obtained without notice of the equitable interest. interest in land must be evidenced in writing this The courts in Nigeria have applied these same is not so under Native Law and Custom, the principles to transfer of interests in land under requirement of writing is unknown to customary native law and custom. The courts have held that transaction in land. In Alake v. Awawu, the if land is sold to a party under native law and plaintiff claimed an account of rent and mesne custom without the execution of a formal deed in respect of certain properties. The of conveyance, his interest was an equitable defendant claimed that one of the properties had interest, but if it is coupled with possession, it been given to him by the mother of both plaintiff cannot be overridden by a legal estate. In the and the defendant. The plaintiff’s argument that case of Etajata v. Ologbo the respondents, as any such was invalid under section 4 of the plaintiff in the old Bendel State filed Statute of Fraud which provided that any the present suit against the defendants/appellant transaction in land should be supported by a note claiming in the main, orders of declaration that or memorandum in writing failed before the the sale of portions of family land at Ugbusi, Supreme Court, the parties to the transaction Ughelli, be set side as the land was the family being natives were bound by customary law. land of the plaintiffs, orders for account of Also the Court of Appeal in Sowoniku v. proceeds of the land and restraining Orotiosakin & Others held that “there is no law further sales of the lands. PW 5 bought a piece that require the Head of the family under Native of land measuring 200ft x 200ft from the Law and Custom to “join in” meaning execute a defendants at the cost of N400.00. The conveyance of family land as neither a “receipt” document evidencing the transaction was nor a “conveyance” as such is known to native tendered as receipt and admitted as Exhibit “D”. law and custom”. The plaintiff succeeded with most of their A sale of land under customary law is validly claims. The High Court specifically ordered: concluded when payment of purchase price “That the land in dispute called Ugbusi land as coupled with actual delivery of the land has been shown in Exhibit D is the property of the entire made, there is concurrence of the vendor and the Omovwiare”. The defendants then appealed to land is handed over in the presence of witnesses the Court of Appeal.

265

KIU Journal of Humanities

The appellate court, while dismissing the appeal, words, equitable interest in land created under varied the above order of the court to wit: native law and custom is equivalent to act of part “It is hereby declared that the plaintiffs are performance capable of being converted to entitled to a customary right of occupancy in specific performance. respect of the land called Ugbusi land and shown on Exhibit C (respondents’ plan) less the 7.3 Customary Pledge area sold to PW 5…..” On further appeal to the There is the tendency to equate a customary Supreme Court, the Court held that supposing pledge to a mortgage. However a customary that Exhibit “D” was admitted as receipt, it pledge is not on all fores the same as a would only establish an acknowledgment of the mortgage. A pledge is a form of security payment of money in respect of the land by the transaction known to customary law. According plaintiffs but not in proof of title to the land as to Smith, a pledge is created where the owner the nature of the title relied upon by the occupier of land known as the pledgor, in order plaintiffs was that of sale under customary law to secure an advance of money or money’s and not by virtue of conveyance. That the worth, gives possession and use of the land to general practice under native law is that the the creditor known as the pledgee until the debt making and giving of receipts of purchase is is fully discharged. In other words, a pledge is a unknown to native law and custom. In the deposit of some personal property to a creditor present case, in order to show that Exhibit “D” as a security for some debt or engagement or the was not admitted as receipt, the trial court performance of some act. The pledgee only has admitted it as a document simpliciter because a the right to possession over the property until the written agreement of sale of land, even though debt is satisfied, while in mortgage, the under native law and custom, is not the same mortgagee acquires ownership (interest is with a purchase receipt as the two of them serve conveyed) and the borrower usually retain different purposes in such a transaction. The possession. A pledge is a possessory security as Court held further: distinct from a proprietary security in mortgages, that if a party received title to land under native thus vesting in the pledgee a right to possession law and custom and there is proof or evidence of land and enjoyment of the profits, while the that money was paid for the land coupled with radical title remain in the pledgor. an entry into possession, it will be sufficient even The relevance of equitable interest in customary to defeat the title of a subsequent purchaser of pledge is the redeemability of the pledged land the legal estate if the possession is continuously however how long it might have been in the maintained. In other words, if land is sold to a possession of the pledgee. In Leragun v. party without the execution of a formal deed of Funlayo, a pledged land which ensured for conveyance, his interest was no more than 30years was held to be redeemable. The right of equitable. Even if it was an equitable interest, the pledgor to recover possession of the land but it is coupled with possession, it cannot be remains with him and is never extinguished overridden by a legal estate. hence the popular saying in customary parlance; In essence, the decision in the case of Etajiata v. “once a pledge, always a pledge”. The pledgor’s Ologbo enhanced the status of a person who has right to redemption cannot be clogged either by paid purchase price or rent and has remained in demanding any amount in excess of the sum for continuous possession in a transaction under which the land was originally pledged or by native law and custom. planting heavy economic trees on the pledged In view of the above decisions of the courts, one land or using any other means to postpone or thing is clear, that under native law and custom defeat the pledgor’s right to redeem. In essence, an agreement for transfer of interest in land equity of redemption which is a creation of though not made in writing is enforceable once equitable interest is also available to redeem there is evidence of payment of purchase price, customary pledges just like in mortgages even the purchaser has been let into possession and after the contractual date of repayment had there is continuous possession which actions are passed. equated to an act of part performance. In other

266

KIU Journal of Humanities

7.4 Requirement of Consent to Alienate prominent and got to the Supreme Court is under the Land Use Act Savannah Bank v. Ajilo where Mr. Ammel Ajilo had mortgaged his property in favour of Another area where equitable interest has come Savannah Bank to secure a loan. On default in handy to play a significant role in whittling repayment of the loan, the bank sought to down the hardship of the provision of the law exercise its statutory power of sale. Mr. Ajilo regarding transfer of interest in land in Nigeria is sought a declaratory order of the court that a the provision requiring Governor’s consent to deed of mortgage was null and void and of no alienate. By the provision of section 1 of the legal effect, the consent of the Governor not Land Use Act (hereby referred to as the Act), all having been first sought and obtained in land comprised in the territory of each state of accordance with section 22 of the Land Use Act. Nigeria is vested in Governor of the state. He relied on section 26 of the Act to submit that Section 5 of the Act gives the Governor the the mortgage transaction and the mortgaged power to grant statutory right of occupancy and deed were void. The trial court granted the said Section 6 of the Act gives similar power to the relief and subsequently upheld by the Court of Local Government in respect of customary right Appeal. On further appeal to the Supreme Court, of occupancy over land not in urban areas of the the Apex court unanimously affirmed the state. decision of the appellate court and accordingly The requirement of Governor’s consent (or held that the mortgage transaction was invalid Local Government as the case may be) to for want of Governor’s consent as required alienation of rights of occupancy (whether under Section 22 and 26 of the Act. statutory or customary) is the subject matter of That was the position of the Supreme Court sections 21, 22 and 23 of the Act. The provision believing its hands to be tied by the provisions of these sections of the Act stipulates that it is of the Act notwithstanding the injustice the strict unlawful to alienate any right of occupancy application of the provision of the Act might either by way of , mortgage and have caused particularly in stifling commercial transfer without the consent of the Governor. transactions. It is worrisome that the Supreme There is no doubt that the requirement of Court became powerless against the provision of Governor’s consent is central to most the Act. One would have expected that the court commercial transactions over land in Nigeria. would follow its own reasoning in Oil Field Most financial institutions normally require Supply Centre Ltd v. Joseph Lloyd John where collateral before loan facility is disbursed and in Eso, JSC observed as follows: most cases prefer securitization in land or landed it is the appellant who should have applied for a property. Before the enactment of the Act, it was permit for him and failed to, before he helped quite convenient to obtain loans from banks and them found the company that now intends to other financial institution for business and other meet him with illegality perpetuated by same developmental purposes by depositing title company. Certainly equity will not allow the deeds in the understanding that the financier company to benefit from their own illegality. could dispose the bare land or developed land in the event of the borrower’s inability to pay up This was the rationale the Court of Appeal the loans. Such transactions are virtually or applied in the case of Adedeji v. National Bank practically difficult since the inception of the of Nig. Ltd. which case was similar to the case of Act because of the consent requirement. The Ajilo. But here, the Court of Appeal came to a implication of the provision for consent is that different conclusion, reasoned that it was the every subsequent transaction on right of defendant who defaulted in his obligation to occupancy either by way of transfer, mortgage, obtain consent. The position of the court became assignment or lease without the requisite consent more clearer in the case of Okunneye v. FBN is void and illegal. The initial inclination of the Plc. In that case the issue was the applicability court was to apply the literal words of the of section 22 and 26 of the Land Use Act to a provision of the Act regarding Governor’s transaction that involved the deposit of title consent. Among such cases the one that was deeds with the bank (equitable mortgage) to

267

KIU Journal of Humanities obtain overdraft. Uwaifo, J.C.A (as he then was) traditional position was that equitable interests held: are minor interest and mere rights in personam under the Land Use Act, the best a holder can which are only enforceable against specified have is a right of occupancy. To alienate that persons. The modern approach consider right under section 22, it has to be done either equitable interests more than mere acts in by assignment, mortgage, or transfer of personam and that they have advanced to rights possession, sublease, or otherwise… It has been in rem in certain circumstances. held that where a statute requires the consent of a specified authority before property can be The paper had highlighted the application of the alienated by way of sale, sublease, assignment, enhanced status of equitable interests to specific mortgage or otherwise, this does not include an property transactions by the courts in Nigeria. agreement to sell or lease, which therefore does These are in the areas of validation of not need such consent. transactions that have incomplete legal formalities; creation of new rights in property However, the Supreme Court soon realized the which include contract for sale, equitable magnitude of injustice that its decision in mortgage, and equity of redemption; and transfer Savannah Bank v. Ajilo could perpetrate and at of interests in land under native law and custom. the earliest opportunity redeemed its position. In Under the latter head, the paper discussed the Awojugbagbe Light Ind. Ltd. v. Chinukwe where role of equitable interests in the sale and Onu J.S.C. affirmed the decision on Okunneye v. alienation of land; elimination of the purchaser FBN Plc. and held inter-alia “…although section of legal estate; and customary pledge. The paper 22 of the Act prohibits the alienation of a right also demonstrated how equity is being invoked of occupancy without the consent of the in the matter of consent to alienation of land Governor first had and obtained, it does not under the Land Use Act. prohibit agreement so to do preparation for the purpose of effecting such alienation”. The paper finds that a contract for sale of land Flowing from the above authorities, it is clear coupled with part performance can defeat the that an agreement for sale of land subject to claim of a purchaser of legal estate who had no Governor’s consent will not be an illegal notice of the equitable interest. The paper also transaction. It is therefore submitted that the finds that in land transactions governed by Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court in the Native law and Custom where the requirement cases just cited above have realized the of writing has not been met but there is evidence significant role of equitable interest in property of purchase, purchase price paid, purchaser is let transaction and thus held that the absence of into possession and there is continuous Governor’s consent may not invalidate an possession, although the interest created might agreement for sale of land which is an equitable be equitable in nature, the equitable interest interest. It is the benefit of equitable interest in created thereby is as good as legal interests and agreement for sale of land as demonstrated in such equitable interests cannot be defeated by the decisions in Okunneye v. FBN Plc and subsequent legal interests. The paper further Awojugbagbe Light Ind. Ltd. v. Chinukwe which finds that where consent to alienate was not now enable people dealing in land to freely obtained which would have been fatal to the transfer their interest in land through the transaction under the Land Use Act; the courts instrument of an agreement subject to have elevated such agreement to alienate to an Governor’s consent without contravening the equitable interest that is valid and enforceable. provisions of section 22 and 23 of the Land Use Given the enhanced status of equitable interests Act. in property and its application to property transactions in Nigeria as demonstrated in this 8. Conclusion paper, it can be asserted that equitable interests in property have transcended the minor interests This paper examined the enhanced status of they were in the traditional view as they have equitable interests in property. While the now almost attained the status of legal estates.

268

KIU Journal of Humanities

Thus, the dichotomy between legal interests and Asein, J. O. (2005) Introduction to Nigerian equitable interests has lost much significance. Legal System, 2nd ed., Ababa press, Lagos, p.25 The paper therefore recommends that some Obilade, A. O. (1979) The Nigerian Legal statutory provisions which exclude equitable System, Spectrum Law Publishers, interests from the definition of “conveyance” Ibadan, pp9-10. should be amended to include equitable interests Asein, J. O. Introduction to Nigerian Legal as instruments that validly convey interests in System, 2nd ed., Ababa press, Lagos, land in Nigeria. (2005), p. 102-107 Obilade, A. O. (1979) The Nigerian Legal References System, Ibadan: Spectrum Law Publishers, (1979) pp 69-72 Megarry R. and Wade, H. W. R. (1975) The Law Kodilinye, G. (2001) An Introduction to Equity of Real Property 4th ed., Stevens and in Nigeria, Daybis Limited, Nigeria, sons, London, , p, 10. Ibadan, (2001), p.27 Smith, I.O. (1999) Practical Approach to law of Dadem, Y. Y. (2009) Property Law Practice in Real Property in Nigeria, Ecowatch Nigeria, Jos University Press Ltd., Jos, Publication, Lagos, pp. 6-26. Bryan, A.G. (1999) Black’s Law Dictionary (7th Andy, G. Austin’s 4th ed., Sweet Edition) West Group, St. Paul Minn, & Maxwell, London, (1979) Vol.1, London p.119 p.388. Megarry, R and Wade, H.W.R (1975) The Law Hanbury, G. (1929) The Field of Modern Equity of Real Property 4th ed., Stevens and 45LQR 196 at 199. sons, London, pp. 113-115. Martin, J. E. (2005) Hambury & Martin Modern Megarry, R. and Baker, P. V. (1973) Snell’s Equity, 7th ed., Sweet & Maxwell Ltd. London, Principles of Equity 27th ed., Sweet and p.17. Maxwell, London, p.105, Dadem, Y. Y. (2009) Property Law Practice in Maudsley, R. H. (1976) Hanbury and Maudsley Nigeria, Jos University Press Ltd., Jos, Modern Equity 10th ed., Stevens and p. 187 Sons, London, , pp. 3-30, and Megarry Waldock, A.R. (1988) Law and Practice of R and Wade, H.W.R., op cit., pp. 110- Mortgages, 2nd Ed.Sweet and Maxwell, 128 London, p.171 Kodilinye, G. (2001) An Introduction to Equity Adelaja & Ors v. Alhaji Salo (1957) ECNLR 37 in Nigeria, Daybis Limited, Nigeria, and Djukpan v. Orovuyoube (1967) FSC Ibadan, pp.1-6, 66. Ikpo, C. (2003) Issues and Principles in Equity, Smith, I.O.(1999) Practical Approach to law of Dimathis Objective Press Ltd., Lagos. Real Property in Nigeria, Ecowatch pp. 23-24, Jegede M.I. (1981) Principles Publication, Lagos, p.65 of Equity, Ethiope Publishing Fekumo, F.J. (2002) Principles of Nigerian Corporation, Benin, p.52. Customary Law, Port Harcourt, F&F Jegede, M .I. (1981) Principles of Equity, Publishers Nigeria Limited p.259 Ethiope Publishing Corporation, James, R.W. (1978) Nigerian Land Use Act Benin, p.8 Policy and Principles, University of Ife Smith, I.O (1999), Practical Approach to law of Press Ltd, p.19. Real Property in Nigeria, Ecowatch Abdulmalik, S.M. (2009) A Critique of the Publication, Lagos, pp..3-5 Provisions of the Land Use Act 1978, Dadem, Y.Y. (2009) Property Law Practice in Okada Law Journal vol.1, p.37. Nigeria, Jos: University Press Ltd., Jos,pp. 6-26.

269