ONN Eko Atlantic 01/05/2024
In Nigeria, it is against the law to construct within 100 meters of a riverbank or 250 meters of a coastline.
Additionally, whether or not the coastal road was constructed, Eko Atlantic had plans to reclaim and fill in an 8.5km stretch of coastline during phases 4, 5, and 6, extending up to Twin Waters Tower.
This information has been publicly available since 2005. Landmark was simply delaying the inevitable. Without Eko Atlantic and its seawall, erosion from the ocean would have eroded the beach up to Water Corporation Drive.
So, basically, Landmark isn't the owner of all the portion he built. Because it's impossible to own the part that was demolished under the law.
And in law, there's a principle: "Quicquid plantatur solo, solo cedit" (whatever is attached to the land belongs to the landowner).
Meaning, anything you build on land that's not yours isn't yours. Could Landmark have bought the land? It's possible. If he had bought the entire place, it means he was defrauded. Because the portion that was demolished can't be legally sold. And in law, such sales that is illegal is null and void.
Also, when you buy land, you have something called title documents, either excision, C of O, or Governor's consent, with registered or provisional survey, receipts, deeds of assignments, court judgment, or gazette that prove the seller has the right to sell what they are selling and what they are selling is in good standing.
Meaning, receipts, survey plans, and contracts of land sale aren't title documents.
That being said, in law, there's something called EQUITABLE REMEDY.
Equitable remedies are court-ordered actions designed to address unfairness or injustice in legal disputes. They aim to provide fair outcomes when monetary damages are insufficient. Examples include injunctions, specific performance, and rescission. And all these exist in the Nigerian legal system.
Section 29 of the Land Use Act guarantees compensation to the occupier, equivalent to the land's value in the year of revocation. This right is also enshrined in the Nigerian Constitution - Section 44(1) of the Federal Constitution of Nigeria 1999 provides as follows: No moveable property or any interest in an immovable property shall be taken possession of compulsorily and no right over or interest in any such property shall be acquired compulsorily in any part of Nigeria except in the manner and for the purposes prescribed by a law that, among other things, requires the prompt payment of compensation thereof and gives to any person claiming such compensation a right of access for the determination of his interest in the property and the amount of compensation to a court of law or tribunal or body having jurisdiction in that part of Nigeria.
So, if Landmark or anyone feels the government has been unfair, malicious, and unreasonable by demolishing that portion of the property, it's within their right to seek a remedy from court. What are their options? They could get an injunction against the demolition process, meaning the court would stop them from carrying out the demolition.
Does it mean an aggrieved party can't do anything because it's been demolished already? No, they can. They can sue for damages, and they will be adequately compensated.
However, there's a cardinal principle that must be fulfilled before you can seek these equitable remedies. It says "He who seeks equity must come with clean hands." In this instance, you must have your title documents to prove the property is yours, and your business has suffered severe loss. And he would definitely be compensated adequately.
God Bless Nigeria.
Comments