Want a well-drafted Deed of Assignment?
Create a Legally Valid Deed of Assignment in Minutes
Governor’s Consent under the Land Use Act — When is it really required?
Land transactions in Nigeria carry an extra step that trips up buyers and sellers: Governor’s consent. For decades this requirement found in the Land Use Act 1978, has been treated as a make-or-break formality for assignments, mortgages, long leases and most transfers of land that are held under a statutory right of occupancy. But the law and its judicial interpretation have evolved, and the practical picture varies by state.
What the Land Use Act actually says (Sections 21 & 22 in simple language)
Section 21 deals with customary rights of occupancy and says (in effect) that such rights cannot be alienated except with the appropriate consent (either the Governor’s consent where the Governor’s jurisdiction is engaged or local government approval in other cases). Section 22 is the headline: it provides that a holder of a statutory right of occupancy (i.e., a right granted by the Governor) may not alienate (assign, mortgage, sub-lease, transfer possession, etc.) that right “howsoever” without the consent of the Governor first had and obtained. The Act also contains related provisions: the Governor may endorse the instrument, demand penal rent for breaches, and where a transfer is not made in accordance with the Act an instrument may be treated as null and void.
The practical takeaway here is that if your land is held under a statutory right of occupancy or evidenced by a Certificate of Occupancy (C of O), the default legal rule is that alienation activities require prior Governor’s consent — unless a specific statutory exception applies (the Act contains narrow exceptions, for example relating to reconveyance or particular mortgage situations).
Which transactions typically require consent
Although the Act reads broadly, the kinds of dealings that commonly trigger the consent requirement are:
-
Assignment (sale) of a statutory right of occupancy (Deed of Assignment).
-
Creation of a long lease or sub-lease where the original title is statutory.
-
Mortgages and legal instruments over land (subject to limited exceptions in the Act).
-
Transfer of possession or any instrument purporting to convey an interest derived from a statutory title.
Who obtains consent? In normal conveyancing practice the transferor (the assignor / vendor) makes the application (through solicitors) and pays the demand notice. The state lands office will typically issue a demand notice after “charting” and assessing a fair-market value (FMV) for the property; the applicant pays the assessed state charges before the Governor’s office will sign/endorse and the Lands Registry will register the perfected instrument. The procedural steps and document checklist (CTC of root of title, deed of assignment, survey, evidence of taxes paid, identification, etc.) are well established and are routinely requested by state lands registry.
Are there statutory exceptions in the Act?
Yes: Section 22 contains limited, express exceptions (for example, certain reconveyances or reconveyances following mortgages where the Governor previously consented). In addition, the courts have applied nuance — historically there was a strict reading (failure = void), but some later authorities and equitable doctrines complicated the picture (see next section on judicial attitudes). Always check the precise exception language in Section 22 before assuming a transaction is exempt.
Consequences of failing to obtain Governor’s consent
Historically the consequences have been severe:
-
Void instrument / null transaction: Older Supreme Court authority treated alienations made without prior consent as void and of no effect, meaning the buyer or mortgagee had no enforceable legal title against the original owner’s continuing interest. This position was strongly established in cases such as Savannah Bank v. Ajilo and reinforced in subsequent Supreme Court decisions.
-
Risk of revocation / penal rent: The Land Use Act gives the Governor powers including demanding penal rent or ultimately revoking a right of occupancy in certain circumstances where the Act’s alienation provisions are breached. Section 28 and related provisions are designed to protect the public interest and the integrity of the state land register.
-
Bank and lender consequences: Banks frequently insist on a perfected chain of title (with Governor’s consent) before lending; where consent is missing lenders will decline to register a mortgage or will refuse disbursement.
-
Title disputes and downstream loss: A buyer who relies on a defective (un-consented) instrument faces a real risk of a court later declaring the transfer ineffective — causing costly litigation, loss of value and messy disputes over who bears the loss.
State practice, costs and timelines (Lagos & other States)
Lagos State (typical example)
-
Fee structure (typical breakdown used by Lagos lands bureaux): consent fee ~1.5% of assessed value, capital gains tax (where applicable) ~0.5%, stamp duty ~0.5%, registration/endorsement ~0.5% — aggregate often quoted as ~3% of assessed value (the precise numbers depend on parcel location and the state gazetted FMV). The Lagos Land Bureau publishes tariff guidance and has formal demand notice procedures.
-
Timeline: Lagos sets short official turnaround targets (e.g., 30 days), but on the ground expect 1–6 months in routine, straightforward files — longer where charting or title irregularities are present, or where the file requires further verification. In premium areas (Ikoyi, Victoria Island) or complex chain-of-title matters it is common to see longer waits.
Other states / FCT
-
Practices vary. Some states charge slightly different percentage mixes; some rely on flat or area-based schedules. The FCT (Abuja) has had different arrangements (e.g., a flat fee for certain C of O actions in recent years). Rural or lower-value states often have lower assessed FMVs and therefore lower absolute fees, but the procedural steps remain broadly similar. Always check the current state lands bureau tariff.
Hidden and professional costs
-
Legal fees, agent fees, survey/charting costs, and retrospective tax liabilities (e.g., CGT on the vendor) can materially increase the total closing cost. Factor in solicitor disbursements (bearer searches, retrospective searches, statutory searches) and bank processing fees if mortgage financing is involved.
Typical steps to obtain Governor’s consent (practical checklist)
-
Confirm root of title and the type of right (is it a statutory right of occupancy / C of O?). If it is statutory, plan to apply for consent.
-
Prepare documents: deed of assignment/draft transfer, certified true copy of C of O/root title, survey plan, tax clearance (if required), passport photographs, corporate documents if a company is involved, proof of payment and identification.
-
Submit Form/cover letter to the state lands bureau and request “charting”/FMV assessment. The bureau issues a demand notice showing the assessed fees (consent fee, registration fee, stamp duty, CGT where applicable).
-
Pay assessed fees and secure receipts; return receipts and requested endorsements to the lands office.
-
Governor’s office endorsement: once fees are paid and documents verified, the Governor (or delegated official) endorses the instrument and the registry will register the perfected instrument.
Timing note: start the consent application early — ideally immediately after exchange of contracts and before completion — because the demand and endorsement process is often the gating item for registration and bank acceptance.
Conclusion — the modern rule
Sections 21 & 22 of the Land Use Act still provide the legal backbone for state oversight of land transfers. Historically, failure to obtain Governor’s consent would render a post-grant alienation void; that judicial stance remains influential. However, the Supreme Court’s decision in Yakubu v. Obaje carved out a narrower application for the consent requirement — limiting it where the interest is not a statutory right of occupancy and the transfer is a private, non-contentious deal. That shift eased some transactional friction, but it did not remove the need for care: for titles evidenced by a C of O and most routine urban transfers, practitioners still treat Governor’s consent as a necessary step.
