Even though, the right of occupancy has been introduced by the land Use Act, it is not specifically defined by the Act. The act in S. 51(1)46 only tries to define customary right of occupancy and statutory right of occupancy. According to this section, customary right of occupancy means the right of a person or community lawfully using or occupying land in accordance with customary law and includes a customary right of occupancy granted by local government under this Act.
While the same  section defined statutory right of occupancy as a right of occupancy granted by the Governor under this Act. But right of occupancy perse is not defined by the Act.
We are therefore, compelled to look at previous similar enactment which defined the term right of occupancy. The most relevant of such enactment in the present context is the land tenure law of the northern Nigeria 1962 47. This is so because the Land Use Act borrowed the right of occupancy system from the land Tenure Law of Northern Nigeria. The said law had defined right of occupancy as follows: “The title to the use and occupation of land and includes a customary right of occupancy and statutory right of occupancy”
Giving the similarity between the Land Tenure Law of Northern Nigeria and Land Use Act, the definition applies Mutatis Mutandis to the land use act. The obvious implication is that right of occupancy has become the highest form of estate of interest capable of enjoyment hence the inception of the land use act.
The position of the law is what the right of occupancy is a new form of right, it is sui – generis, a hybrid of personal, proprietary and usupructory rights in land. This position is in all four similar to the view expressed by the privy council in Preinchand  Nathy and Co. Ltd v Land Office 48 that the concept of the right of occupancy is sui – generis and that the intension of the law in introducing the right of occupancy system was to establish an entirely new interest in land.
Also, Prof. Omaotala 49 asserts that “there is nothing wrong in the right of occupancy being a new form of right, and submits that a right of occupancy is a hybrid form of right something between personal and proprietary right.
From the foregoing, there are too broad categories of right of occupancy, which are dependent on the locus situs of the land in question. If the land is situate in a non – urban area, it is capable of customary right of occupancy. On the other hand, if it is situate in an urban area, it can only be the subject of a statutory right of occupancy. 
Share on Google Plus


The publications and/or documents on this website are provided for general information purposes only. Your use of any of these sample documents is subjected to your own decision NB: Join our Social Media Network on Google Plus | Facebook | Twitter | Linkedin