In law, the general rule is that whenever a person purchases a landed property, it is presumed that it is the land that the person bought. The buyer bought the land but for the reason of the buyer becoming the owner of the land, he now owns whatever else that is found on or found in the land including the house and the plants.
“Whoever owns the land, owns the building erected, owns the plants planted and owns whatsoever other things that are found on the land”.
If you are buying land, you buy everything that comes with the land unless there is a clause to that effect that a particular item on the land is to be excluded from the sale.
Tekedia Mini-MBA edition 14 (June 3 – Sept 2, 2024) begins registrations; get massive discounts with early registration here.
Tekedia AI in Business Masterclass opens registrations here.
Join Tekedia Capital Syndicate and invest in Africa’s finest startups here.
This supports the controversial position that if land is sold and after the purchase, a very valuable mineral is found on the land, as expected, the purchaser is to own whatever is found in or on that land.
This rule is known as the quicquid rule and when stated in full, it is “Quicquid plantatur solo, solo cedit”.
Quicquid plantatur solo, solo cedit is of Latin origin which when loosely translated in English simply means that “whatever is affixed to the soil (land) belongs to the soil (land) and whoever therefore owns the soil (land) owns whatever that is found on it”.
This legal Latin principle is related to fixtures which means that something that is on or in the land or becomes affixed to the land becomes part of the land; therefore, the title to the fixture is a part of the land and passes with title to the land. Therefore, whosoever owns that piece of land will also own the things attached or affixed to the land.
The sole purpose of the principle or the quicquid rule as it is famously called here in Nigeria is to ensure that a purchaser of land does not acquire title or ownership of something which is not intended to pass with the land. This by a clause inserted in the contract of assignment states that a particular item despite the fact it is on the land does not pass to the purchaser. The principle also ensures that the correct title does pass to a purchaser in case a previous owner attempts to assert that a fixture was a chattel and therefore belonged to them. For a seller to ensure that a particular item that is on the land which could be of sentimental value to the seller does not pass to the purchaser, the seller must insert a clause to that effect in the agreement.
In Nigeria, this quicquid rule has been adhered to by the court of law in a plethora of cases. In the old case of OSHA V. OLAYOAYE (1966) NLR 32, the defendant built a house on land in which he was a customary law tenant without the consent of the real owner of the land, the court it was held that the owner of the land was the owner of the house as such was part of the Land because it was permanently attached to the land.
This quicquid rule becoming a judicial precedent can be traced back to the case of LANCASTER V EVE (1959) 141 ER 288 @ 393 where the court established this doctrine. The doctrine just as it is applicable under English law is also applicable under customary law although section 1 of the Land Use Act limits its application under the statute.