LEGAL PRINCIPLE: LAND LAW – Certificates of Occupancy – Effect – Prima Facie Evidence Only
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
The existence of a certificate of occupancy is merely a prima facie evidence of title to the land it covers and no more. Nor does mere registration validate spurious or fraudulent instrument of title or a transfer or grant which in law is patently invalid or ineffective.The existence of a certificate of occupancy is merely a prima facie evidence of title to the land it covers and no more. Nor does mere registration validate spurious or fraudulent instrument of title or a transfer or grant which in law is patently invalid or ineffective.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Iguh, JSC, in Kyari v. Alkali & Ors (2001) NLC-2241993(SC) at p. 23; Paras D–E.
"The existence of a certificate of occupancy is merely a prima facie evidence of title to the land it covers and no more. Nor does mere registration validate spurious or fraudulent instrument of title or a transfer or grant which in law is patently invalid or ineffective."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
A Certificate of Occupancy is only prima facie evidence of title, not conclusive. It can be challenged and set aside. Registration does not validate spurious, fraudulent, or invalid instruments. The certificate does not cure underlying defects in title. The holder must still prove valid root of title. If the grant was invalid (e.g., land already subject to a deemed grant), the certificate is void. The court examines the validity of the grant, not merely the existence of the certificate. This prevents the Land Use Act from being used to perfect invalid claims. The certificate’s evidentiary weight is rebuttable.