LEGAL PRINCIPLE: LAND LAW — Statutory Right of Occupancy — Conflict between two grants — Priority of earlier grant over later grant
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
Where two parties trace title to the same land to the same grantor, the party who first obtained a valid grant has priority. The grantor, having divested himself by the first grant, has nothing left to convey to the later grantee under the principle nemo dat quod non habet.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Katsina-Alu, JSC, in Dantsoho v. Mohammed (2003) NLC-511996(SC) at pp. 11–12; Paras A–C.
"Where two contesting parties trace their title in respect of the same piece of land to the same grantor, the applicable principle of law has always been that the latter in time of the two parties to obtain the grant cannot maintain an action against the party who first obtained a valid grant of the land from such a common grantor because the grantor having successfully divested himself of title in respect of the piece of land in question by the first grant would have nothing left to convey to a subsequent grantee under the elementary principle of nemo dat quod non habet as no one may convey what no longer belongs to him."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
The earlier grant prevails over the later grant. The principle applies nemo dat quod non habet. The rule protects the first valid grantee. The later grantee acquires no title. The court will uphold the priority of the first grant. The principle is well-established.