LEGAL PRINCIPLE: LAND LAW – Proof of Title – Traditional History – Party Not Bound to Plead Multiple Roots of Title
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
The law is well settled that the party claiming land is not bound to plead and prove more than one root of title to succeed. If he relies on more than one root, that is merely to make assurance doubly-sure. In other words he does that ex abundanti cautela.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Onu, JSC, in Biariko v. Edeh-Ogwuile & Ors (2001) NLC-741996(SC) at p. 21; Paras C–D.
"The law is well settled that the party claiming land is not bound to plead and prove more than one root of title to succeed. If he relies on more than one root, that is merely to make assurance doubly-sure. In other words he does that ex abundanti cautela."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
A claimant need only plead and prove one root of title to succeed. Relying on multiple roots is permissible but not required—it is “ex abundanti cautela” (out of abundant caution). The party may choose the strongest root. The court will not penalize the party for not proving alternative roots. The principle prevents defendants from arguing that failure to prove an alternative root defeats the claim. One successful root suffices. The party may present multiple roots for assurance, but the court need only find one valid. The rule promotes efficiency—claimants need not over-plead. The burden remains on the claimant to prove at least one root of title.