LEGAL PRINCIPLE: LAND LAW – Certificate of Occupancy – Not Conclusive Evidence of Title
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
A certificate of statutory or customary right of occupancy issued under the Land Use Act, 1978 cannot be said to be conclusive evidence of any right, interest or valid title to land in favour of the grantee. It is, at best, only a prima facie evidence of such right, interest or title without more and may in appropriate cases be effectively challenged and rendered invalid and null and void.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Iguh, JSC, in Olohunde & Anor v. Adeyoja (2000) NLC-151995(SC) at p. 15; Paras A–C.
"A certificate of statutory or customary right of occupancy issued under the Land Use Act, 1978 cannot be said to be conclusive evidence of any right, interest or valid title to land in favour of the grantee. It is, at best, only a prima facie evidence of such right, interest or title without more and may in appropriate cases be effectively challenged and rendered invalid and null and void."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
A Certificate of Occupancy is not conclusive proof of title—it is only prima facie evidence. It can be challenged and rendered invalid. The holder cannot rely solely on the certificate without proving underlying title. The grant does not cure defects in the grantee’s root of title. Where another person has better title, the certificate may be set aside. This prevents the Land Use Act from being used to perfect invalid claims. The certificate merely evidences government’s grant of right to occupy, not that the grantee is the true owner. Substantive ownership must still be proved.