TITLE OF THE ARTICLE: The Jurisdiction of Area Courts and Customary Courts over Title to Land: A Review of Olaleye-Ote v Babalola Olaleye-Ote v Babalola
AUTHOR:
T.A. Yusuf, LL.B (Hons.), (Unilorin), LL.M (Ife), Senior Lecturer, Nigerian Law School, Kano Campus, taofikyusuflaw@yahoo.co.uk
ABSTRACT
A decision of the Supreme Court is binding on it and all other lower courts in the hierarchy of courts in the country. This is by virtue of the doctrine of stare decisis et non quieta movere, which means – to stand by what has been decided and not to unsettle things already established. Though judgments of the Supreme Court are final, its justices are not infallible. It is from the foregoing, that the theme of this article stems. Its main thrust revolves round the decision of the Supreme Court in Olaleye-Ote v Babalola (2012) All FWLR (Pt.645) 328 and the focus is on that part of the decision where the court held that a customary court of Ogun State has the jurisdiction to entertain disputes arising from a customary right of occupancy by virtue of section 41 of the Land Use Act, irrespective of the value or rental value of the land as limited by the statute establishing the court. This paper review the case in light of section 41 of the Land Use Act and came to the conclusion that the said provision cannot cannot confer jurisdiction on a customary court of Ogun State without taking into consideration the value or rental value of the land in dispute as provided for by section 16 of the 1st Schedule of the Ogun State Customary Court Edict and other relevant laws stated in the decision under review.