JAFFAR V. LADIPO

• Pages: 135-143

JAFFAR V. LADIPO



135

ant to show that the plaintiff has or should have obtained an alternative employ-

ment."

Since the respondents have riot shown that the appellant had or should have

5



obtained an alternative employment, they have not discharged this onus. Dam-

ages to the appellant will be assessed, therefore, on the basis of 15 months' pay

less the pay for 3 1/2 (three and a half) months' which he had already received

from his employers, made up of 2

1

/

2

(two and a half) months' pay as salary and

one months's pay in lieu of notice. This amounts to £1,610:19s:2d.

10



We accordingly order that the respondents pay to the appellant -

(a)

damages assessed at £1,610:19s:2d., and

(b)

costs in the court below assessed at 85 guineas and in this court assessed

at 57 guineas.

15



Appeal allowed.

JAFFAR V. LADIPO

20

MADAM FATIMA JAFFAR

V

25 EZEKIEL ABIODUN LADIPO

OBJECTOR/APPELLANT

CAUTIONER/RESPONDENT

SUIT NO. SC 270/1967

SUPREME COURT OF NIGERIA

COKER,



J.S.C.

LEWIS,



J.S.C.

30



MADARIKAN,



J.S.C.

11th April, 1969.

Land Law - Registration of Titles - Registration of caution under S.44 Registration

of Titles Act - Transfer on Form 7 by Non- registered owner does not enable

35



caution to be registered as it is purported dealing with registered land in

accordance with provisions of Act and not outside Act - No intention to

create equitable interest.

ISSUES:

40



1. What is the effect of section 42(2) of the Registration of Titles Act on the

provisions of section 28 of the Act ?

2. Whether the interest of a transferee whose transfer is in the process of

registration, becomes an equitable interest by virtue of section 28 of the

Registration of Titles Act.

45



3. At what point does a transferee become the registered owner of land

transferred?

4. Whether section 44 of the Registration of Titles Act creates a right to register a

caution.

FACTS:

50



The Respondent applied to the Registrar of Titles to register a caution pursuant

to section 44 of the Registration of Titles Act. The appellant objected to this as

she was still the registered leaseholder. The Registrar dismissed the application

of the respondent who appealed and it was allowed in the High Court. The Ob-

jector then appealed to the Supreme Court.