WHETHER AN APPLICANT NEEDS TO ESTABLISH TITLE OF THE LAND HE OCCUPIES, BEFORE HE CAN BRING AN ACTION TO ENFORCE HIS FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AGAINST WHOEVER VIOLATES HIS RIGHT OF OCCUPATION OF THE LAND/PROPERTY.

CASE TITLE: GOVERNMENT OF ENUGU STATE OF NIGERIA & ORS v. SUNDAY ONYA & ORS (2021) LPELR-52688(CA)                                                                                                                   

JUDGMENT DATE:         28th JANUARY, 2021

JUSTICES:                         AHMAD OLAREWAJU BELGORE JCA

                                           ITA GEORGE MBABA JCA

                                           JOSEPH OLUBUNMI KAYODE OYEWOLE JCA

COURT DIVISION:         ENUGU

PRACTICE AREA:          Constitutional Law – Enforcement of Fundamental Human Rights.

FACTS:

​The Respondents, were allocated spaces to build stalls at what later became ENSEPA Mini Shops by the Enugu State Environmental Protection Agency (ENSEPA), an Agency of the Government of Enugu State. The Respondents paid the necessary approved fees, as demanded by the Appellants for the stalls/shop and were put in possession of their respective allocated spaces, following which they developed the stalls according to the prototype and specifications from ENSEPA.

The Appellants later issued notices to the Respondents to vacate their stalls in the park claiming compulsory acquisition of the stalls by the government. Subsequently, they demolished the stalls built by Respondents and which the Respondents occupied. The Respondents sought the services of Estate Surveyors and Valuers to value their demolished property and the firm valued the property at N850,000.00 each and issued certificates to each of the Respondents.

The Respondents as Applicants, then filed a representative action at Enugu State High Court seeking to enforce their fundamental human rights and for compensation from the Appellants for the compulsory acquisition and demolition of their stalls. The High Court found the Appellants liable for breach of the Respondents Fundamental Rights and granted their reliefs, including the award of N850,000.00 to each of them and also exemplary damages and cost against the Appellants.

Dissatisfied, with the decision of the trial High Court, the Appellants appealed.

ISSUES:

The appeal was determined upon consideration of the following issues:

(1) Whether the suit was properly instituted by the Applicants (Respondents), jointly.

(2) Whether the trial Court was right to hold the Appellants liable for breach of fundamental rights of Respondents, in the circumstances of the case.

WHAT OUR CLIENTS ARE SAYING…

I enjoy the software. Law Pavilion, Thumbs up!”

~BARR. NWAFILI OKWUOSA

lawpavilion

Recent Posts

Nigeria’s Digital Lending Revolution: FCCPC’s New Rules, Big Fines, Unsettled Waters and Uncharted Territory

Nigeria's digital lending landscape is undergoing a seismic shift. The Federal Competition and Consumer Protection…

5 days ago

The Legal Test for When a Company Is “Unable to Pay Its Debts

CASE TITLE: AURECON AMEI LTD & ANOR v. ZUMA ENERGY (NIG) LTD (2025) LPELR-81425(CA) JUDGMENT…

5 days ago

What is a Liquidated Money Demand?

CASE TITLE: MAJOR CONCEPT LTD. & ANOR v. EZE (2025) LPELR-80563 (SC) JUDGMENT DATE:  21ST…

5 days ago

Whether an Action for Breach of Contract Comes Within the Purview of Fundamental Human Rights

CASE TITLE:  UBA PLC V. ASIME (2025) LPELR-82099 (CA) JUDGMENT DATE: 15TH AUGUST, 2025 PRACTICE…

5 days ago

Does the Sharia Court of Appeal Have Jurisdiction to Entertain Appeals in Respect of Contractual Transactions?

CASE TITLE: DANDAWA & ANOR v. DANDAWA (2025) LPELR-82098(CA) JUDGMENT DATE: 19TH SEPTEMBER, 2025 PRACTICE…

5 days ago

Third Party Investigations and Six-Year Limit for Tax Assessments

INTRODUCTION The tax investigation involving Lafarge Africa Plc (Lafarge) and the Ogun State Internal Revenue…

2 months ago