No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Striking a Balance between Protecting the Matrimonial Home and the Mortgagee's Right of Sale in Nigeria: Lessons from England
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 03 July 2023
Abstract
This article evaluates statutory provisions and case law regarding a mortgagee's rights to exercise its statutory power of sale over the matrimonial home in Nigeria. It reveals that no statute protects the rights of family members, particularly wives and children, in the mortgaged home. The mortgagee must grapple with the reality of ownership, as wives often resort to litigation to set aside sales, on the ground that they are joint owners with their husbands. Ironically, some Supreme Court decisions, while protecting the interests of other family members (contrary to the established principles of property law), have tended to ignore the mortgagee's power of sale over the mortgaged matrimonial home, thus making it unattractive to lending institutions as collateral. This article recommends that all parties’ interests should be set out in a legal framework, as in England, where a non-owning spouse's right of occupation must be registered with the land registry.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of SOAS University of London
Footnotes
*
LLB (Ambrose Alli University), BL (Law School, Abuja), LLM (Uniben), PhD (Uniben). Senior lecturer, Department of Private and Property Law, Faculty of Law, Ambrose Alli University, where the author teaches family law, equity and trusts, engineering law and business law.
References
1 Herring, J Family Law (2nd ed, 2004, Pearson Education) at 151Google Scholar.
2 Smith, IO Nigerian Law of Secured Credit (2001, Ecowatch Publication) at 1Google Scholar.
3 Id at 2.
4 Mortgage and Property Law 2012 of Lagos State, sec 67. This law was amended in 2015.
5 Atiba Iyalamu Savings and Loans Ltd v Suberu [2018] 13 NWLR (pt 1637) 387 at 392; Bank of the North Limited v Bello [2000] 7 NWLR (pt 664) 244 at 257. These authorities (from the Supreme Court of Nigeria and Court of Appeal) explain clearly the nature and consequences of a legal mortgage. In Nigeria, this is also commonly the case with equitable mortgagees.
6 [1994] 1 AC 180 at 188. A Kehinde “Perfecting securities for loan in the banking industry: Realisation of such securities and limitations therefore” (1989) The Nigerian Business Law and Practice Journal 65.
7 Douglas, G An Introduction to Family Law (2nd ed, 2004, Oxford University Press) at 96CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Lesser, H “The acquisition of inter vivos matrimonial property rights in English law: A doctrinal melting pot” (1973) 23/2 The University of Toronto Law Journal 150CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
8 Matrimonial Property Act 2013 (Kenya), sec 2.
9 Ibeabuchi v Ibeabuchi [2016] LPELR 41268 (CA); Sunmonu v Sunmonu [2021] LPELR 5600 (CA).
10 Ogunnubi v Ogunnubi [2021] LPELR 53493 (CA).
11 [1970] AC 777.
12 [1992] 5 NWLR (pt 241) 273.
13 [2002] 5 NWLR (pt 761) 564.
14 [2009] 9 NWLR (pt 1146) 311.
15 [1991] 5 NWLR (pt 94) 739.
16 [2006] 6 NWLR (pt 977) 632 at 643.
17 Iliyasu v Iliyasu [2011] 13 NWLR (pt 1264) 236; Anieto v Anieto [2019] LPELR-47223 9 (CA).
18 Law of Marriage Act 1971 (Tanzania), sec 59(2).
19 [2003] UKHL 43, para 89.
20 Smith Nigerian Law of Secured Credit, above at note 2 at 78.
21 CLPA, sec 19(1) (only applicable to eastern and northern states).
22 PCL, sec 123(1) (applicable to the western states).
23 MPL (amended in 2015), sec 40(1).
24 [1930] 1 WACA 63 at 67.
25 Chianu, E Law of Securities for Bank Advances (2nd ed, 2004, Ambik Press) at 111–12Google Scholar.
26 Pearce, R and Barr, W Pearce and Stevens’ Trusts and Equitable Obligations (6th ed, 2015, Oxford University Press) at 277Google Scholar.
27 [2009] 9 NWLR (pt 1146) 311.
28 Chianu, E Law of Securities for Bank Advances (3rd ed, 2017, Ambik Press) at 177–78Google Scholar.
29 [1990] 6 NWLR (pt 154) 111 at 121.
30 Ibid.
31 [2014] LPELR-2418 (CA).
32 Ibid.
33 Chianu Law of Securities, above at note 28 at 178.
34 Ibid.
35 [2011] 13 NWLR (pt 1264) 236 at 258.
36 [1996] 3 NWLR (pt 437) 383. There is no evidence on record to show that the substantive case was continued. In many cases in Nigeria, the interlocutory action usually terminates the substantive suit, as the parties do not see the need to waste further time and resources pursuing the substantive case. This case was peculiar because the interlocutory action lasted for over ten years, until shortly after the mortgagee went into liquidation.
37 Id at 392.
38 Id at 390.
39 [1930] 10 NLR 10.
40 Chianu Law of Securities, above at note 28 at 180.
41 Above at note 36.
42 [2011] 11 NWLR (pt 1259) 562.
43 Id at 580.
44 Id at 587.
45 Nevitt, DA and Levin, J “Social policy and the matrimonial home” (1973) 36/4 The Modern Law Review 345Google Scholar.
46 [1969] 1 WLR 286 at 293–94.
47 Ibid.
48 Douglas An Introduction to Family Law, above at note 7 at 99.
49 Ibid.
50 McFarlane v McFarlane [2006] UKHL 24.
51 [1981] AC 487.
52 Juss, SS Judicial Discretion and the Right to Property (1998, Printer) at 25Google Scholar.
53 Ibid.
54 Douglas An Introduction to Family Law, above at note 7 at 210.
55 [1994] 1 AC 180. Giliker, P “Barclays Bank v O'Brien revisited: What a difference five years can make” (1999) 62/4 The Modern Law Review 609CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Gravells, NP “Undue influence and substitute mortgages” (2005) 64/1 The Cambridge Law Journal 42CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
56 [1994] 2 FLR 18.
57 [2001] 4 All ER 449. Morris, D “Surety wives in the House of Lords: Time for solicitors to ‘get real’?” (2003) 11 Feminist Legal Studies 57Google Scholar.
58 [2002] EWCA Civ 55 CA.
59 [2003] EWCA Civ 487.
60 FLA, sec 33.
61 Herring Family Law, above at note 1 at 149.
62 Ibid.
63 FLA, sec 30(3).
64 Id, sec 30(8).
65 Id, sec 33(5).