SUMMARY OF CURRENT DECISION OF THE SUPREME COURT IN BENJAMIN VS. KALIO

The Supreme Court in its leading judgment delivered by Eko JSC, in  MOSES BENJAMIN & ORS. vs. KALIO & KALIO (201) 15 NWLR (PT. 1641) has discarded registration as a sine qua non for the admissibility of land documents in evidence before the court.



In its unanimous agreement, the Supreme Court held that in much as the land documents are properly pleaded before the court, land documents are admissible as proof of title.

In the lead judgment, the Supreme court has reviewed the provisions of Section 20 of the Rivers State Land Instruments Law; Sections 4(3), and 5, and Item 23 of the 1999 Constitution. Supreme Court has also considered its previous decisions in plethora cases such as OJUGBELE vs. OLASOJI, AKINTOLA & ANOR. vs. SOLANO, EDOKPOLO & CO. LTD. vs. OHENHEN, OGBIMI vs. NIGER CONSTRUCTION LIMITED, which had earlier affirmed the provisions of the Land Instruments Law and held that an unregistered registrable instrument cannot be pleaded in evidence.

The Court came to the unanimous decision that in view of the inclusion of Evidence in the Exclusive Legislative List, Section 20 of the State Laws is an act of legislative trespass into the exclusive legislative terrain. A document that is pleaded and admissible under the Evidence Act which cannot be rendered unpleaded and inadmissible by the State Law.

Therefore, unregistered land documents are admissible even as proof of title.

The implications of the Supreme Court decision are:

1. Objections based on non-registration of registrable instruments can no longer be upheld in a court of law;
2. Decisions of the lower courts which run contrary to the pronouncement of the Supreme Court unregistered land documents will be quashed on appeal.
3. It will make the sections of the state laws ineffective.