Certification Study Material

April 2026

Table of Contents

The lease constitutes one of the most pervasive and commercially significant instruments in Nigerian property law, serving as the principal mechanism through which possessory interests in land and buildings are granted for defined periods without the permanent alienation of the reversion. In an economy where mortgage finance, commercial real estate development, and residential accommodation are inextricably linked, the capacity to understand, draft, and negotiate lease agreements is not merely an academic exercise but a foundational professional competency for every mortgage broker, valuer, and legal practitioner operating within the Nigerian property market. It is through the lease that landlords secure periodic returns on their real estate investments, that tenants obtain the security of tenure necessary for both habitation and business planning, and that mortgage lenders assess the income-generating capacity of properties offered as collateral.

This lesson examines the law of leases in Nigeria with sustained attention to the manner in which leases are created, the essential elements that render a lease valid and enforceable, and the critical distinction between a lease and an outright assignment of interest. Consideration is given, in addition, to the covenant framework within which the rights and obligations of landlord and tenant are defined—including the covenants to pay rent, to repair, and to insure—and to the legal consequences that flow from a breach of such covenants. The provisos that commonly appear in well-drafted lease instruments, most notably the option to renew and the proviso for re-entry and forfeiture, are examined with reference to recent appellate authority, including the decision of the Court of Appeal in Pillars Nigerian Limited v. Desbordes (2021). The lesson further addresses the modes by which a lease may be determined, the formal parts of a lease instrument, and the distinctive regulatory regime established by the Lagos Tenancy Law 2011 (as amended in 2022) and the tenancy practices prevailing in the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja.

Throughout the discussion, ethical issues arising in the context of lease transactions are identified and evaluated, given their particular relevance to professionals seeking certification under the Institute of Mortgage Brokers Limited of Nigeria. The practitioner who completes this lesson should be equipped not only to advise clients on the legal incidents of leasehold interests but also to identify risks, ensure regulatory compliance, and conduct transactions in accordance with the highest standards of professional integrity.

Learning Objectives

Upon successful completion of this lesson, the candidate shall be able to:

Identify and explain the three modes by which a lease may be created under Nigerian law, distinguishing between oral leases, written leases, and leases created by deed.

Enumerate and apply the essential elements of a valid lease, including the requirement for certainty of parties, premises, term, and rent.

Distinguish, with precision, between a lease and an assignment of interest in land, and articulate the practical consequences of that distinction for mortgage transactions.

Analyse the function and construction of rent review clauses in commercial leases, with particular attention to upward-only review mechanisms and open-market rent determinations.

Describe the principal covenants found in Nigerian lease instruments, including the covenants to pay rent, to repair, and to insure, and discuss the decision in Nigerian Properties Co Ltd v. Doherty as it relates to the enforcement of such covenants.

Explain the doctrine of covenants touching and concerning the land, distinguishing between covenants that run with the land and those that are merely personal.

Evaluate the legal effect of provisos for renewal and forfeiture in lease agreements, with reference to Pillars Nigerian Limited v. Desbordes (2021) and the conditions precedent to the exercise of a right of re-entry.

Describe the various modes by which a lease or tenancy may be determined at law, including effluxion of time, notice to quit, surrender, merger, disclaimer, and forfeiture.

Identify the formal parts of a lease instrument and explain the significance of each constituent element.

Discuss the key provisions of the Lagos Tenancy Law 2011 (as amended 2022) and the tenancy practices applicable in the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja.

Recognise and respond to ethical issues that arise in lease transactions, including conflicts of interest, non-disclosure, and the duty to advise impartially.

A lease, in the orthodox understanding of Nigerian property law, is a grant of exclusive possession of land or premises for a determinate period, ordinarily in consideration of the payment of rent. The lessee (or tenant) acquires a possessory estate that is less than the freehold—or, in jurisdictions governed by the Land Use Act 1978, less than the right of occupancy held by the lessor—while the lessor retains the reversion expectant upon the termination of the lease. The dual character of the lease as both a conveyance of an estate in land and a contract between the parties is well established in the Nigerian case law and has important consequences for the remedies available upon breach, the assignability of rights and obligations, and the application of equitable principles.

It must be observed, at the outset, that the terminology employed in practice may vary. The expressions "lease," "tenancy," and "demise" are often used interchangeably, although strict usage reserves "lease" for grants of a definite term exceeding three years—particularly where the grant is effected by deed—and employs "tenancy" for periodic arrangements or shorter fixed terms created by simple agreement. The grantor is described variously as the "lessor," the "landlord," or the "demiser," and the grantee as the "lessee," the "tenant," or the "demisee." Regardless of the label, the substantive legal analysis remains the same: the essential inquiry is whether the arrangement confers exclusive possession for a certain term at a rent.

The requirement of exclusive possession is of cardinal importance. Where the occupier does not enjoy exclusive possession but is instead permitted to use premises subject to the continuing control and supervision of the owner, the arrangement is properly characterised as a licence rather than a lease, and the occupier acquires no estate in the land. The distinction between a lease and a licence has been the subject of extensive judicial consideration in Nigeria, and the courts have consistently held that the substance of the arrangement, rather than the label affixed by the parties, determines its true character. In Thomas v. Holder (1946), the court emphasised that the hallmark of a tenancy is the grant of exclusive possession, and that a document described as a "licence" may nonetheless be construed as a lease if its terms confer exclusive possession for a definite period.

Under the Land Use Act 1978, which vests all land in each state in the Governor, leasehold interests in urban areas may be created only by the holder of a statutory or customary right of occupancy, and the consent of the Governor is required for the grant of any sublease or underletting. Section 22 of the Land Use Act provides that the holder of a statutory right of occupancy shall not alienate the right or any part thereof by assignment, mortgage, transfer of possession, sublease, or otherwise without the consent of the Governor. It follows that any purported lease of land within an urban area that is granted without gubernatorial consent is voidable at the instance of the Governor, and, where the consent is refused, may be set aside entirely. This statutory overlay is a distinctive feature of the Nigerian leasehold regime and differentiates it from the common law position prevailing in England and other jurisdictions from which the Nigerian legal system has historically drawn its principles.

The law recognises three modes by which a lease may be created: by oral agreement, by writing under hand, and by deed. The mode of creation that is required in any given case depends principally upon the duration of the term to be granted and the statutory requirements applicable in the relevant jurisdiction. Each mode is examined in turn.

An oral lease—sometimes described as a parol lease—is one that is created by verbal agreement between the parties, without any written instrument. Under the common law as received into Nigerian jurisprudence, an oral lease is valid and enforceable only where the term does not exceed three years and the lease takes effect in possession at the best rent reasonably obtainable without a fine (premium). This principle is derived from the Statute of Frauds 1677 (as received) and is reflected in the Property and Conveyancing Law 1959 (applicable in the Western Region states, now including Lagos State), section 67(2), and in the Conveyancing Act 1881 (applicable in states where the received English law continues to apply).

The practical significance of the oral lease in the Nigerian context is considerable, particularly in the residential sector and in rural communities where the formalities of written agreements are not invariably observed. Periodic tenancies—whether weekly, monthly, quarterly, or yearly—frequently arise by oral agreement, and the courts have consistently upheld the validity of such arrangements provided that the statutory maximum of three years is not exceeded. It should be noted, however, that difficulties of proof attend oral leases, and disputes as to the terms agreed, the commencement date, and the amount of rent payable are not uncommon. For this reason, it is the universal recommendation of professional bodies, including the Nigerian Institution of Estate Surveyors and Valuers, that all leases be reduced to writing regardless of their duration.

Where an oral agreement purports to create a lease for a term exceeding three years, the agreement is unenforceable as a legal lease, though it may, in appropriate circumstances, give rise to an equitable lease if the doctrine in Walsh v. Lonsdale (1882) is engaged—that is, if there is a specifically enforceable agreement for a lease supported by part performance or sufficient acts of the parties from which the existence of the agreement may be inferred. The equitable lease, however, is inferior to the legal lease in several respects: it does not bind a bona fide purchaser for value of the legal estate without notice, and it may be defeated by the refusal of specific performance where the party seeking enforcement has not come to equity with clean hands.

A written lease is one that is evidenced or created by a document signed by the parties or their authorised agents, but which falls short of execution as a deed. Written leases are effective to create legal leasehold estates for terms not exceeding three years, provided the other conditions for the creation of a legal lease are met (including the requirement that the lease takes effect in possession at the best rent without a fine). For terms exceeding three years, a written agreement that does not satisfy the requirements for a deed operates only as a contract for a lease—that is, it creates an equitable interest in the land, enforceable by the remedy of specific performance, but does not create a legal estate.

The importance of the written lease as a form of documentation cannot be overstated in practice. The written agreement serves as the primary evidence of the terms upon which the tenancy has been granted, including the identity of the parties, the description of the premises, the duration of the term, the amount and frequency of rent, and the covenants and conditions to which the parties have agreed. Section 4 of the Statute of Frauds, as received into Nigerian law, requires that any contract for the sale or other disposition of land, or any interest in land, be evidenced by a memorandum or note in writing signed by the party to be charged or by some other person thereunto lawfully authorised by the party in writing. This requirement applies to leases exceeding three years.

A deed is a formal instrument that is signed, sealed, and delivered by the executing party or parties. Under the Property and Conveyancing Law 1959, section 67(1), a conveyance of any estate or interest in land—including the grant of a legal lease for a term exceeding three years—must be made by deed. Compliance with this requirement is essential for the creation of a legal estate in the land; in the absence of a valid deed, the purported lease operates at most as an agreement for a lease, creating an equitable interest only.

The execution of a lease by deed entails several formal requirements. First, the instrument must be described as a deed or must indicate on its face that it is intended to be a deed. Second, it must be signed by the grantor in the presence of at least one attesting witness. Third, it must be sealed, although in modern practice the requirement of sealing is often satisfied by the affixing of a paper wafer or the inclusion of the words "signed, sealed, and delivered" adjacent to the signature. Fourth, the deed must be delivered, which in law means that the executing party must manifest an intention to be bound by the instrument. Delivery may be actual or constructive, and in the case of a company, the deed is delivered when it is executed in accordance with the Companies and Allied Matters Act 2020.

Where a lease is created by deed, it must additionally comply with the registration requirements applicable in the relevant jurisdiction. In Lagos State, the Land Registration Law 2015 requires that all instruments affecting interests in land be registered at the Lagos State Lands Registry, and an unregistered instrument, though valid as between the parties, shall not be available in evidence in any court as proof of title. Under the Land Instruments Registration Law applicable in Northern Nigerian states, a similar requirement of registration applies. Non-registration does not render the lease void, but it deprives the instrument of the evidential protection afforded by registration.

Case Study: Creation of Lease — Practical IllustrationA prospective tenant approaches a property owner in Ikeja, Lagos, seeking to lease commercial premises for a term of seven years.

The parties agree on the rent, commencement date, and other material terms.

However, the agreement is set out in a simple written document that is signed by both parties but is not executed as a deed.

Notwithstanding the apparent agreement, the document fails to create a legal lease because the term exceeds three years and the instrument has not been executed as a deed.

The document operates, at best, as an agreement for a lease—that is, an equitable lease enforceable by specific performance—and the tenant acquires an equitable interest rather than a legal estate.

Had the parties wished to create a legal lease, the document would have had to be executed as a deed, signed, sealed, and delivered, and registered at the Lagos State Lands Registry.

For a lease to be valid and enforceable at law, the following essential elements must be present. The absence of any one of these elements may render the purported lease void, voidable, or unenforceable, depending upon the nature of the deficiency and the jurisdiction in which the property is situated.

The parties to the lease must be identified with sufficient certainty. The lessor must be a person who possesses the legal capacity and the requisite estate or interest to grant the lease. Under the Land Use Act 1978, a lease of urban land may be granted only by the holder of a statutory or customary right of occupancy, and where the lessor is not the holder of such a right, the purported lease may be set aside. The lessee must likewise be a person capable in law of holding an interest in land. Where the lessee is a company, it must be duly incorporated under the Companies and Allied Matters Act 2020, and where it is a foreign entity, additional restrictions may apply under the Land Use Act and the Nigerian Investment Promotion Commission Act 1995.

The demised premises must be described with sufficient particularity to enable their identification. The description should include the physical address, the boundaries (whether by reference to a survey plan or by metes and bounds), and any appurtenant rights—such as rights of way, parking spaces, or common areas—that form part of the demise. Where the premises cannot be ascertained from the terms of the lease, the instrument may be declared void for uncertainty.

The duration of the lease must be certain or capable of being rendered certain at the commencement of the term. A lease "for as long as the tenant wishes" or "for the duration of the war" does not satisfy the requirement of certainty, although the courts have in some cases intervened to construe such expressions as creating periodic tenancies determinable by notice. The commencement date and the expiry date (or the mechanism for ascertaining the expiry date) must be stated or ascertainable from the terms of the instrument. Where a lease is granted for a fixed term—say, five years from the first day of January 2026—the requirement of certainty is plainly satisfied. Where the lease is periodic, the certainty requirement is met by the fact that each period is of determinate duration, and the lease continues from period to period until determined by notice.

As has been observed above, the grant of exclusive possession is the hallmark of a lease. The tenant must be given the right to exclude all other persons—including the landlord—from the demised premises during the currency of the term, subject only to the landlord’s reserved rights (such as the right to enter for inspection or repair). Where exclusive possession is not conferred, the arrangement is properly characterised as a licence, and the occupier acquires no proprietary interest in the land.

Although the payment of rent is not, strictly speaking, an essential element of a lease at common law—a lease at a peppercorn rent or even at no rent being theoretically possible—the reservation of rent is, in practice, a universal feature of Nigerian leases and is, under certain statutory provisions, a requirement for the creation of a legal lease without a deed. Section 67(2) of the Property and Conveyancing Law 1959 stipulates that a lease taking effect in possession for a term not exceeding three years at the best rent which can be reasonably obtained without taking a fine may be created without a deed. The implication is that, where no rent is reserved, the exemption from the requirement of a deed does not apply, and the lease—regardless of its duration—must be created by deed.

Under the Land Use Act 1978, the consent of the Governor is required for the grant of any sublease or other alienation of a right of occupancy or any part thereof. The grant of a lease of urban land constitutes an alienation for the purposes of section 22 of the Act, and the failure to obtain the requisite consent renders the lease voidable at the instance of the Governor. Although the Supreme Court has held, in Savannah Bank of Nigeria Ltd v. Ajilo (1989), that a transaction concluded without Governor’s consent is not void ab initio but merely inchoate—and capable of ratification by the subsequent grant of consent—the prudent practitioner will ensure that consent is obtained prior to the execution of the lease to avoid the risk of the transaction being set aside.

The distinction between a lease and an assignment is of fundamental importance in property law and in the practice of mortgage broking, for it determines the nature and extent of the interest acquired by the grantee, the obligations owed to the grantor and to third parties, and the enforceability of covenants contained in the original instrument.

A lease, as has been discussed, is a grant of exclusive possession for a determinate period, at the expiry of which the right of possession reverts to the lessor. The lessor retains the reversion—that is, the right to resume possession of the premises upon the expiry or earlier determination of the lease—and the relationship of landlord and tenant subsists for the duration of the term. The lessee’s interest is less than the interest held by the lessor, and the lessee is under an obligation to observe the covenants contained in the lease, including the covenant to pay rent and the covenant to yield up possession at the end of the term.

An assignment, by contrast, is a transfer of the whole of the assignor’s existing interest in the property. Where a lessee assigns the unexpired residue of the lease to an assignee, the assignee steps into the shoes of the assignor and acquires the totality of the leasehold estate. The assignor, upon completing the assignment, ceases to hold any estate in the land, and the privity of estate between landlord and tenant passes to the assignee. It follows that the assignee becomes directly liable to the landlord for the performance of covenants that run with the land, while the assignor’s liability under the original covenants continues only by virtue of privity of contract—a principle that has significant consequences for the assessment of credit risk in mortgage lending.

A sublease (or underletting) is to be distinguished from an assignment. A sublease arises where the lessee grants to a third party a term that is less than the unexpired residue of the headlease. In such a case, the lessee retains a reversion on the sublease and remains liable to the headlessor under the covenants of the headlease, while the sublessee becomes the tenant of the sublessor. There is no privity of estate between the headlessor and the sublessee, and the headlessor cannot enforce the covenants of the headlease directly against the sublessee unless the covenant in question has been expressed as a restrictive covenant and the sublessee has notice of it.

| |

Feature | Lease / Sublease | Assignment

Nature of Interest | Grant of possessory interest for a limited term; reversion retained by grantor | Transfer of the whole of the assignor’s existing interest; no reversion retained

Privity of Estate | Created between lessor and lessee (or sublessor and sublessee) | Passes from assignor to assignee; assignee assumes direct relationship with landlord

Liability for Covenants | Lessee remains liable under privity of contract; sublessee liable to sublessor only | Assignee liable under privity of estate; assignor’s liability continues under privity of contract

Governor’s Consent | Required under section 22, Land Use Act | Required under section 22, Land Use Act

Rent Obligation | Lessee pays rent to lessor; sublessee pays rent to sublessor | Assignee pays rent directly to the original landlord

A rent review clause is a provision in a lease that enables the rent payable to be adjusted at specified intervals during the term. The inclusion of rent review clauses in commercial and long-term residential leases is standard practice in Nigeria, driven by the need to protect the landlord against the erosive effect of inflation and to ensure that the rent payable under the lease bears a reasonable relationship to the current market value of the premises. In the absence of a rent review clause, the rent agreed at the commencement of the lease remains fixed for the entirety of the term—a situation that may result in substantial undervaluation of the landlord’s reversion and a corresponding windfall to the tenant over the course of a long lease.

Rent review clauses vary in their complexity and operation, but three broad categories may be identified. First, the fixed-increase clause, which provides for the rent to increase by a specified amount or percentage at predetermined intervals (for example, a ten per cent increase every two years). Second, the index-linked clause, which ties the rent to an external index—such as the Consumer Price Index published by the National Bureau of Statistics—so that adjustments track general movements in the cost of living. Third, the open-market rent review clause, which provides for the rent to be adjusted to the open-market rental value of the premises as at the review date, as determined by agreement between the parties or, in default of agreement, by an independent valuer or arbitrator.

The upward-only rent review clause—a provision stipulating that the rent may be adjusted upward at each review date but may not be reduced below the rent payable immediately before the review—is commonly encountered in Nigerian commercial leases. The justification advanced by landlords is that the upward-only clause protects the security of the income stream and, by extension, the capital value of the reversion; tenants, however, have criticised such clauses on the ground that they eliminate the protection that a true open-market review would otherwise afford in a falling market. The enforceability of upward-only clauses has not been directly challenged in the Nigerian appellate courts, but the general principle of freedom of contract suggests that such clauses, being freely negotiated between competent parties, are valid and enforceable.

The practitioner should be alert to the procedural requirements specified in rent review clauses. Many clauses prescribe time limits within which the landlord must serve a trigger notice initiating the review process, the tenant must serve a counter-notice, and the matter must be referred to a valuer or arbitrator in default of agreement. The question whether such time limits are "of the essence" of the contract—such that failure to comply results in the loss of the right to review—has been the subject of considerable jurisprudence. In the absence of an express provision making time of the essence, the courts in other common law jurisdictions have generally held that time limits in rent review clauses are not of the essence, and the better view is that the same approach would be adopted in Nigeria, although there is as yet no definitive appellate authority on the point.

Covenants are the promises and undertakings made by the parties to a lease, and they constitute the framework within which the mutual rights and obligations of the landlord and the tenant are defined. Covenants may be express—that is, set out in the terms of the lease instrument—or implied by statute or common law. The following paragraphs examine the principal covenants encountered in Nigerian lease agreements.

The tenant’s covenant to pay rent is, invariably, the most important covenant from the landlord’s perspective, for it is the rent that constitutes the economic return on the landlord’s investment and that, in the case of properties subject to mortgage, services the debt obligations of the landlord-borrower. The covenant to pay rent is typically expressed to require payment in advance, at specified intervals (monthly, quarterly, or annually), and on dates certain. In the event of the tenant’s failure to pay rent in accordance with the terms of the covenant, the landlord has recourse to a range of remedies, including an action for debt, distress for rent (where still available), and, subject to the terms of the lease, forfeiture.

In the seminal case of Nigerian Properties Co Ltd v. Doherty, the Supreme Court considered the enforceability of covenants in a lease and the circumstances in which the landlord’s remedies for breach of the tenant’s covenants may be exercised. The court affirmed the principle that the covenant to pay rent is a fundamental obligation of the tenancy, the breach of which entitles the landlord to pursue the remedies provided by the lease or by statute. The court further held that the enforcement of the covenant to pay rent is subject to the procedural requirements prescribed by the applicable tenancy legislation, and that the landlord must, in all cases, comply with the statutory notices and procedures before exercising the remedy of forfeiture or re-entry.

Case Study: Nigerian Properties Co Ltd v.

DohertyIn Nigerian Properties Co Ltd v.

Doherty, the Supreme Court examined the scope and enforceability of covenants contained in a lease of commercial premises.

The landlord sought forfeiture of the lease on the ground of the tenant’s persistent breach of the covenant to pay rent.

The Court held that the covenant to pay rent is a fundamental incident of the tenancy and that a pattern of persistent non-payment, where it amounts to a material breach, entitles the landlord to invoke the proviso for re-entry and forfeiture contained in the lease.

The decision underscored that landlords must nonetheless observe the procedural requirements of the applicable tenancy legislation when exercising the right of re-entry, including the service of the prescribed statutory notices.

The covenant to repair allocates between the landlord and the tenant the responsibility for maintaining the demised premises in a specified condition during the currency of the lease. In the absence of an express covenant, the common law imposes upon the tenant an obligation not to commit waste—that is, an obligation not to cause damage to the premises beyond what is attributable to fair wear and tear—but does not impose a positive duty to repair. The prudent landlord will therefore ensure that the lease contains an express repairing covenant, specifying the standard of repair required, the scope of the tenant’s obligations (whether extending to structural elements or confined to internal repair and decoration), and the consequences of breach.

The construction of repairing covenants has given rise to considerable litigation in the common law world. A covenant to keep the premises "in good and tenantable repair" imposes an obligation to maintain the premises in a condition fit for occupation by a reasonably-minded tenant of the class likely to take the premises, having regard to the age, character, and locality of the building. A covenant to "put and keep" the premises in repair imposes the additional obligation to bring the premises up to the required standard at the commencement of the term, even if the premises were in a state of disrepair when the lease was granted.

In the Nigerian context, the repairing obligation is of particular significance in the mortgage sector, where the condition of the property directly affects its value as collateral. A mortgage lender whose security consists of a leasehold interest will ordinarily require that the lease contains adequate repairing covenants, and may insist upon periodic inspections to verify compliance. The deterioration of a property through want of repair may trigger a breach of the loan covenants and entitle the lender to call in the loan or to exercise the power of sale.

The covenant to insure requires one or both of the parties to maintain insurance over the demised premises against specified risks, typically including fire, flood, civil commotion, and—increasingly in urban Nigeria—the risk of building collapse. The covenant commonly specifies the insurer (or class of insurer), the sum insured (usually the full reinstatement value of the premises), the risks to be covered, and the application of insurance proceeds in the event of a claim. In practice, it is the landlord who assumes the obligation to insure in the case of multi-tenanted buildings, with the cost of insurance being recovered from the tenants through the service charge or as an additional rent payment.

The importance of insurance covenants in the context of mortgage lending cannot be overstated. The lender’s security interest in the property is protected, in part, by the existence of adequate insurance, and the standard mortgage conditions issued by Nigerian banks invariably require the borrower to maintain insurance throughout the term of the loan. Where the borrower’s interest is a leasehold estate, the lender will scrutinise the insurance covenant in the lease to ensure that it provides adequate protection. In the decision in Nigerian Properties Co Ltd v. Doherty, the court acknowledged the interrelationship between the covenants in a lease and observed that the covenant to insure, like the covenant to repair, is properly regarded as touching and concerning the land and, as such, runs with the reversion and binds successors in title.

The doctrine of covenants touching and concerning the land is of critical importance in determining whether the obligations contained in a lease are enforceable by and against persons other than the original parties—that is, assignees of the reversion and assignees of the lease. A covenant is said to "touch and concern" the land if it affects the nature, quality, mode of user, or value of the land, or if it is connected with something to be done upon, in relation to, or in connection with the land. Such a covenant is to be distinguished from a personal covenant, which confers a benefit or imposes a burden that is independent of the parties’ interests in the land.

The test formulated by the courts for determining whether a covenant touches and concerns the land involves a consideration of three criteria. First, the covenant must benefit the reversioner or the tenant in their capacity as reversioner or tenant, and not merely in a personal capacity. Second, the covenant must affect the nature, quality, or value of the land or the mode of its enjoyment. Third, the covenant must not be expressed to be personal to the original parties.

Covenants that have been held to touch and concern the land include the covenant to pay rent, the covenant to repair, the covenant to insure, the covenant not to assign or sublet without consent, and the covenant restricting the use of the premises. Covenants that have been held to be personal include a covenant by the landlord to repay a deposit at the end of the term (which relates to a sum of money rather than to the land itself) and a covenant by the tenant to repair premises other than the demised premises.

The practical consequence of the distinction is that covenants touching and concerning the land run with the reversion under the rule established by the Conveyancing Act 1881 (sections 10 and 11) and with the leasehold estate by virtue of privity of estate. Thus, where the landlord assigns the reversion, the assignee is entitled to enforce the tenant’s covenants that touch and concern the land and is bound by the landlord’s covenants of like character. Similarly, where the tenant assigns the lease, the assignee becomes liable on the covenants that touch and concern the land by virtue of privity of estate, though the original tenant’s liability continues by virtue of privity of contract.

For the mortgage professional, the doctrine has direct practical consequences. Where a mortgagee exercises its power of sale over a leasehold interest, the purchaser (as assignee of the lease) acquires the benefit and assumes the burden of all covenants that touch and concern the land. The mortgagee must, accordingly, ensure that the covenants contained in the lease are commercially acceptable to a potential purchaser and do not contain onerous obligations that might deter prospective bidders or depress the sale price.

Provisos in a lease are clauses that qualify, condition, or restrict the rights and obligations of the parties. The two provisos of greatest practical significance—and the two that are most frequently the subject of litigation—are the option to renew and the proviso for re-entry and forfeiture.

An option to renew is a clause in the lease that confers upon the tenant the right to obtain a new lease of the premises upon the expiry of the current term, subject to the fulfilment of specified conditions. The conditions typically require that the tenant has observed and performed all the covenants contained in the existing lease, that the tenant has given notice of the exercise of the option within the prescribed time, and that the new lease is to be granted on terms to be agreed or, in default of agreement, on terms to be determined by an independent valuer or arbitrator. The option to renew is a valuable right, particularly for commercial tenants who have invested in fitting out the premises and whose businesses depend upon continuity of occupation at a known location.

The legal nature of the option to renew has been the subject of judicial analysis. It is now settled that an option to renew is an irrevocable offer by the landlord to grant a new lease, which becomes binding upon the landlord when the tenant exercises the option in accordance with its terms. Once the option is exercised, the landlord is under an obligation to grant the new lease, and the tenant may obtain specific performance if the landlord refuses. The option is, however, personal to the tenant in whose favour it is granted and does not, in the absence of express provision to the contrary, pass to an assignee of the lease.

In practice, the drafting of the option to renew requires careful attention to the conditions precedent to its exercise, the mechanism for determining the rent under the new lease, and the question whether the new lease is to contain a further option to renew (a so-called "perpetual renewal clause," which the courts have historically viewed with disfavour and which, in the absence of clear language, will not be implied).

The proviso for re-entry and forfeiture is the clause in the lease that entitles the landlord to terminate the lease and re-enter the premises in the event of a breach by the tenant of the covenants or conditions contained in the lease. The right of re-entry is not available at common law in the absence of an express proviso; accordingly, the inclusion of a forfeiture clause is a matter of standard drafting practice in all professionally prepared leases.

The exercise of the right of forfeiture is, however, subject to significant statutory and equitable restrictions. Before the landlord may proceed to forfeit the lease for breach of a covenant other than the covenant to pay rent, the landlord must first serve a notice under the Conveyancing Act 1881, section 14 (or its local equivalent), specifying the breach complained of, requiring the tenant to remedy the breach (if the breach is capable of remedy), and requiring the tenant to make compensation in money for the breach. The tenant is entitled, within a reasonable time after service of the notice, to remedy the breach and thereby avoid forfeiture. Where the breach is not capable of remedy—as is the case with certain breaches of a covenant against assignment or subletting without consent—the notice need not require remediation but must nonetheless be served.

Even after the landlord has served the requisite notice and the tenant has failed to comply, the court retains a discretionary power to grant relief from forfeiture. The equitable jurisdiction to grant relief is exercised where the court is satisfied that forfeiture would be disproportionate to the gravity of the breach and that the tenant is willing and able to remedy the breach and compensate the landlord for any loss.

Case Study: Pillars Nigerian Limited v.

Desbordes (2021)In Pillars Nigerian Limited v.

Desbordes (2021), the Court of Appeal considered the validity of a purported forfeiture of a commercial lease and the circumstances in which relief from forfeiture may be granted.

The landlord had purported to forfeit the lease on the ground of the tenant’s breach of certain covenants, but the tenant contended that the landlord had failed to comply with the statutory notice requirements and that the forfeiture was, in consequence, void.

The Court of Appeal held that the right of re-entry and forfeiture must be exercised in strict compliance with the procedural requirements prescribed by the applicable tenancy legislation.

The court further affirmed that a tenant who is able and willing to remedy the breach and to compensate the landlord for any loss sustained is entitled, in the exercise of the court’s equitable jurisdiction, to relief from forfeiture.

The decision in Pillars Nigerian Limited v.

Desbordes is of considerable practical significance for mortgage brokers and property professionals, as it reinforces the principle that the forfeiture of a lease is a remedy of last resort, to be invoked only after the landlord has exhausted the procedural protections afforded to the tenant by statute.

A lease or tenancy may be determined—that is, brought to an end—by any of the following means, each of which has distinct legal requirements and consequences.

Where a lease has been granted for a fixed term, the lease determines automatically upon the expiry of the term, without the necessity for any notice or other formality. The tenant’s right to possession ceases at midnight on the last day of the term, and the landlord is entitled to resume possession of the premises. In practice, however, the parties may agree to the grant of a new lease or the tenant may hold over (remain in possession after the expiry of the term), in which case a tenancy at will or a periodic tenancy may arise by implication.

A periodic tenancy—whether yearly, quarterly, monthly, or weekly—is determined by the service of a notice to quit. The notice must be of the length prescribed by the applicable tenancy legislation. Under the Recovery of Premises Act (applicable in states that have not enacted their own tenancy legislation), the required notice period is: one week for a weekly tenant, one month for a monthly tenant, three months for a quarterly tenant, and six months for a yearly tenant. In Lagos State, the Lagos Tenancy Law 2011 (as amended 2022) prescribes its own notice periods, which are discussed in the section of this lesson devoted to that legislation. The notice must be in writing, must specify the date on which the tenancy is to determine, and must be served on the tenant in the manner prescribed by statute.

Surrender is the yielding up of the lease by the tenant to the landlord before the expiry of the term, with the consent of the landlord. Surrender may be express (effected by deed or writing) or implied (arising by operation of law, as where the tenant accepts a new lease from the landlord on terms inconsistent with the continuation of the existing lease). Upon surrender, the lease is extinguished and the landlord’s reversion is accelerated; any sublease carved out of the surrendered lease is, however, preserved, and the subtenant becomes the direct tenant of the landlord.

Merger occurs when the leasehold estate and the reversionary interest become vested in the same person in the same capacity. Where a tenant acquires the landlord’s reversion, or where the landlord acquires the tenant’s lease, the lesser estate is absorbed into the greater, and the lease is extinguished by merger. Merger does not, however, occur automatically in equity; the court will enquire into the intention of the parties and, where it would be unconscionable for the merger to take effect, may treat the lease as subsisting for the protection of the parties’ interests.

A lease may be disclaimed by a trustee in bankruptcy or a liquidator where the lease is regarded as an onerous obligation that is not beneficial to the bankrupt’s estate or the company in liquidation. The effect of disclaimer is to terminate the lease and to release the bankrupt or the company from future liability under the covenants, although the rights of third parties—such as subtenants and mortgagees—are preserved and may be the subject of vesting orders by the court.

Forfeiture, as discussed above in the context of the proviso for re-entry, is the termination of the lease by the landlord in consequence of the tenant’s breach of a covenant or condition. The procedural requirements for the exercise of forfeiture, and the tenant’s right to seek relief, have been addressed in the preceding section. It is to be noted that forfeiture extinguishes both the headlease and any subleases derived from it, unless the subtenant obtains relief from the court in the form of a vesting order.

A well-drafted lease follows a conventional structure, and the formal parts of a lease instrument may be identified as follows. An understanding of these constituent elements is essential for the mortgage professional, who is called upon to review lease documents in the course of due diligence and to advise clients on their adequacy and enforceability.

Commencement (Date and Parties): The instrument commences with the date of execution and the identification of the parties. The lessor and the lessee are described by their full names (and, in the case of companies, their registration numbers), and their respective capacities are stated.

Recitals: The recitals set out the background to the transaction, including the lessor’s title to the property, the circumstances giving rise to the lease, and any prior negotiations or agreements that have led to the execution of the instrument.

Operative Words (Demise): The operative clause contains the words of grant—typically "the Lessor hereby demises unto the Lessee"—and sets out the premises, the term, and the consideration (rent and, where applicable, any premium).

Habendum: The habendum specifies the estate granted and the duration of the term. It commences with the words "TO HOLD" and defines the period for which the lease is to subsist.

Reddendum: The reddendum is the clause that reserves the rent payable under the lease. It specifies the amount of rent, the dates upon which rent is payable, and the manner of payment.

Covenants: The covenants set out the mutual obligations of the landlord and the tenant, including the covenants to pay rent, to repair, to insure, not to assign or sublet without consent, and to use the premises only for specified purposes.

Provisos: The provisos include the proviso for re-entry and forfeiture, the option to renew, and any other conditions or qualifications upon the rights of the parties.

Schedules: The schedules contain ancillary information, such as a description of the demised premises, a schedule of condition, a schedule of permitted uses, and (where applicable) a schedule of service charge contributions.

Testimonium and Attestation: The testimonium recites the execution of the deed by the parties ("IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties have hereunto set their hands and seals"), and the attestation clause records the details of the witness or witnesses to the execution.

The Lagos Tenancy Law 2011, as amended by the Lagos Tenancy Law (Amendment) 2022, represents the most comprehensive legislative intervention in landlord-and-tenant relations in any Nigerian state. The Law was enacted in response to the chronic housing deficit in Lagos State, the prevalence of arbitrary evictions, and the widespread practice of demanding multiple years of rent in advance—a practice that placed an excessive financial burden upon tenants and distorted the operation of the rental market. The key provisions of the Law may be summarised as follows.

First, the Law restricts the payment of rent in advance to a maximum of one year for residential tenancies and a specified period (which varies according to the category of premises) for commercial tenancies. Any demand by a landlord for rent in advance exceeding the statutory maximum is an offence under the Law. Second, the Law prescribes mandatory notice periods for the termination of tenancies, which differ from those under the Recovery of Premises Act. For a monthly tenant, the required notice period is one month; for a quarterly tenant, three months; for a half-yearly tenant, six months; and for a yearly tenant, six months. The notice must be in writing and must be served personally or by registered post.

Third, the Law establishes the Lagos State Rent Tribunal, which is vested with jurisdiction to determine disputes between landlords and tenants, including disputes relating to the recovery of possession, the quantum of rent, the condition of premises, and the payment of compensation upon eviction. The Rent Tribunal is intended to provide a quicker and more accessible forum for the resolution of tenancy disputes than the conventional courts. Fourth, the Law prohibits the engagement of thugs or agents of intimidation for the purpose of evicting tenants, and prescribes criminal penalties for any person who forcibly ejects a tenant otherwise than in compliance with a court order or the provisions of the Law.

The 2022 amendment to the Lagos Tenancy Law introduced several additional protections, including enhanced penalties for non-compliance, provisions for the electronic filing of tenancy agreements, and clarification of the rights of tenants in respect of security deposits. The amendment also addressed the question of the applicability of the Law to tenancies created before its commencement, confirming that the notice requirements and the restrictions on advance rent apply to all subsisting tenancies regardless of the date of creation.

The Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, does not have dedicated tenancy legislation equivalent to the Lagos Tenancy Law. Tenancy relations in Abuja are governed by a combination of the Recovery of Premises Act (which applies as federal legislation in the FCT), the Land Use Act 1978, and the general principles of contract law. The absence of specific regulatory intervention has meant that many of the practices that the Lagos Tenancy Law was designed to address—such as the demand for multiple years of rent in advance, the arbitrary ejection of tenants, and the absence of effective dispute resolution mechanisms—continue to prevail in the Abuja rental market.

In practice, landlords in Abuja commonly demand two to three years of rent in advance for both residential and commercial premises, and in certain high-demand locations, advance payments of up to five years have been reported. The absence of a statutory cap on advance rent places tenants at a significant disadvantage, particularly in a market characterised by excess demand and limited supply. The notice periods prescribed by the Recovery of Premises Act apply in the FCT, but compliance is uneven, and tenants frequently report that landlords fail to serve the requisite notices before commencing proceedings for recovery of possession.

There have been recurrent calls for the enactment of dedicated tenancy legislation in the FCT, modelled on the Lagos Tenancy Law, and the Federal Capital Territory Administration has, at various times, indicated its intention to introduce such legislation. As at the date of this lesson, however, no comprehensive tenancy law has been enacted for the FCT, and the regulatory framework remains fragmented and, in the view of many commentators, inadequate to the demands of a rapidly urbanising territory with a population that continues to grow in excess of national demographic trends.

For the mortgage professional operating in the Abuja market, the absence of comprehensive tenancy regulation creates both risks and opportunities. The principal risk lies in the uncertainty surrounding tenancy rights, which may affect the income projections for properties offered as mortgage collateral and the lender’s ability to enforce its security in the event of default. The opportunity, conversely, lies in the potential for regulatory reform to stabilise the rental market and enhance the value of rental properties as mortgage assets. The prudent practitioner will monitor legislative developments in the FCT and advise clients accordingly.

The professional engaged in lease transactions—whether as a mortgage broker, a valuer, a legal practitioner, or a property manager—is subject to ethical obligations that transcend the technical requirements of the law. The following ethical issues are of particular relevance to the practice of leasing in Nigeria.

A conflict of interest arises where the professional’s personal interests, or the interests of one client, are or may be in conflict with the interests of another client or with the professional’s duty of impartiality. In the context of lease transactions, conflicts of interest may arise where the mortgage broker acts for both the landlord and the tenant, where the valuer has a financial interest in the property being valued, or where the legal practitioner advises both parties to the lease without making adequate disclosure. The Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners in Nigeria (2007) prohibit a legal practitioner from acting for two or more parties whose interests are in conflict, and analogous prohibitions are found in the codes of conduct of the Nigerian Institution of Estate Surveyors and Valuers and the Mortgage Banking Association of Nigeria.

The professional is under a duty to make full and frank disclosure of all material facts to the client, and to ensure that the client understands the terms and implications of the lease before execution. In the context of a mortgage transaction secured by a leasehold interest, the mortgage broker is expected to disclose to the lender any material defects in the lease, including onerous covenants, the absence of a rent review clause, the proximity of the lease to its expiry date, and any unresolved disputes between the landlord and the tenant. The failure to make such disclosure may amount to professional negligence and may expose the broker to liability in damages.

The practice of demanding excessive advance rent—particularly from low-income tenants who may have limited bargaining power—raises ethical concerns that extend beyond the legal requirements of the Lagos Tenancy Law. The mortgage professional should be mindful of the social context in which lease transactions take place and should refrain from facilitating or condoning practices that are exploitative, even where such practices are not expressly prohibited by law. The professional’s obligation to act in the public interest, as articulated in the codes of conduct of the relevant professional bodies, requires that commercial considerations be balanced against considerations of fairness and social responsibility.

Lease transactions, particularly those involving the payment of substantial premiums or advance rent, may be susceptible to exploitation for money laundering purposes. The professional is required, under the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act 2011 (as amended 2022) and the regulations of the Special Control Unit Against Money Laundering, to exercise due diligence in verifying the identity and the source of funds of the parties to a lease transaction, and to report any suspicious transactions to the Nigerian Financial Intelligence Unit. The failure to comply with anti-money laundering obligations exposes the professional to criminal liability and may result in the forfeiture of the proceeds of the transaction.

KEY TAKEAWAYSA lease is a grant of exclusive possession for a determinate period, ordinarily at a rent, and may be created orally (for terms up to three years), by writing, or by deed (required for terms exceeding three years).The essential elements of a valid lease are certainty of parties, premises, term, exclusive possession, rent, and (in respect of urban land) Governor’s consent under the Land Use Act 1978.A lease is distinguishable from an assignment in that the lessor retains the reversion; an assignment transfers the whole of the assignor’s interest without retention of any reversionary interest.Rent review clauses protect the landlord against inflation and may operate by fixed increase, index-linking, or open-market review; upward-only clauses are common in Nigerian commercial leases.The principal covenants in a lease are the covenants to pay rent, to repair, and to insure; Nigerian Properties Co Ltd v.

Doherty affirmed that the covenant to pay rent is a fundamental obligation enforceable subject to statutory procedures.Covenants that touch and concern the land run with the reversion and with the leasehold estate, binding successors in title; personal covenants do not run.The option to renew becomes a binding obligation upon exercise; the proviso for forfeiture must be exercised in strict compliance with statutory notice requirements, as confirmed in Pillars Nigerian Limited v.

Desbordes (2021).A lease may be determined by effluxion of time, notice to quit, surrender, merger, disclaimer, or forfeiture.The Lagos Tenancy Law 2011 (as amended 2022) caps advance rent, prescribes notice periods, and establishes the Rent Tribunal; Abuja lacks equivalent legislation and relies on the Recovery of Premises Act.Ethical obligations in lease transactions include the avoidance of conflicts of interest, full disclosure, the protection of vulnerable tenants, and compliance with anti-money laundering regulations.

15. Self-Assessment Questions

1. Which of the following is required for the creation of a legal lease for a term exceeding three years?

   1. An oral agreement between the parties
   2. A written agreement signed by both parties
   3. A deed that is signed, sealed, and delivered
   4. A letter of intent from the landlord

2. The hallmark of a lease, as distinguished from a licence, is:

   1. The payment of a premium
   2. The grant of exclusive possession for a determinate period
   3. Registration at the Lands Registry
   4. The consent of the Governor

3. In an assignment of a leasehold interest, the assignor:

   1. Retains the reversion on the lease
   2. Transfers the whole of the unexpired interest to the assignee
   3. Creates a sublease in favour of the assignee
   4. Becomes the landlord of the assignee

4. A rent review clause that provides for rent to be adjusted to the open-market rental value at specified intervals is known as:

   1. A fixed-increase clause
   2. An index-linked clause
   3. An open-market rent review clause
   4. A peppercorn rent clause

5. In Nigerian Properties Co Ltd v. Doherty, the Supreme Court held that:

   1. The covenant to insure does not touch and concern the land
   2. The covenant to pay rent is a fundamental incident of the tenancy, the breach of which may entitle the landlord to forfeiture subject to statutory procedures
   3. A lease created orally for ten years is valid at law
   4. Governor’s consent is not required for the grant of a commercial lease

6. Under the Lagos Tenancy Law 2011 (as amended 2022), the maximum advance rent that may be demanded for a residential tenancy is:

   1. Six months
   2. One year
   3. Two years
   4. Three years

7. The doctrine of covenants touching and concerning the land provides that:

   1. All covenants in a lease bind successors in title regardless of their nature
   2. Only covenants that affect the nature, quality, or value of the land run with the reversion and the estate
   3. Personal covenants run with the land if they are expressed in a deed
   4. Covenants cease to be enforceable upon the assignment of the lease

8. The decision in Pillars Nigerian Limited v. Desbordes (2021) affirmed which of the following principles?

   1. A landlord may forfeit a lease without serving statutory notices
   2. The right of forfeiture must be exercised in strict compliance with statutory procedures, and relief from forfeiture may be granted in appropriate cases
   3. A tenant has no right to apply for relief from forfeiture
   4. The proviso for re-entry is implied in every lease

9. Which of the following is NOT a mode by which a lease may be determined?

   1. Effluxion of time
   2. Notice to quit
   3. Estoppel
   4. Surrender

10. The formal part of a lease that specifies the estate granted and the duration of the term is known as:

    1. The reddendum
    2. The habendum
    3. The recital
    4. The testimonium

Detailed Explanations

1. C. A lease for a term exceeding three years must be created by deed—that is, an instrument that is signed, sealed, and delivered by the grantor. Section 67(1) of the Property and Conveyancing Law 1959 provides that a conveyance of any estate or interest in land must be made by deed, and a lease for a term exceeding three years is a conveyance for this purpose. An oral agreement or a simple written agreement is insufficient to create a legal lease for such a term, though either may give rise to an equitable lease enforceable by specific performance.

2. B. The grant of exclusive possession for a determinate period is the hallmark of a lease. Where the occupier does not enjoy exclusive possession but occupies the premises under the continuing control and supervision of the owner, the arrangement is a licence, not a lease. The payment of a premium, registration at the Lands Registry, and Governor’s consent, while relevant to the validity and enforceability of a lease, are not the defining characteristics that distinguish a lease from a licence.

3. B. In an assignment of a leasehold interest, the assignor transfers the whole of the unexpired residue of the lease to the assignee. The assignor does not retain any reversion on the lease; if the assignor retained a reversion, the transaction would be a sublease, not an assignment. The assignee steps into the shoes of the assignor and becomes directly liable to the landlord for the performance of covenants that run with the land.

4. C. An open-market rent review clause provides for the rent to be adjusted to the open-market rental value of the premises at specified review dates, as determined by agreement between the parties or by an independent valuer. A fixed-increase clause specifies a predetermined increase, while an index-linked clause ties the rent to an external price index.

5. B. In Nigerian Properties Co Ltd v. Doherty, the Supreme Court held that the covenant to pay rent is a fundamental incident of the tenancy, and that a persistent breach of this covenant entitles the landlord to invoke the proviso for re-entry and forfeiture. The Court emphasised, however, that the landlord must comply with the statutory notice requirements before exercising the right of re-entry.

6. B. The Lagos Tenancy Law 2011 (as amended 2022) restricts the demand for advance rent to a maximum of one year for residential tenancies. Any demand for advance rent exceeding this statutory maximum constitutes an offence under the Law.

7. B. The doctrine provides that only covenants that affect the nature, quality, or value of the land, or the mode of its enjoyment, run with the reversion and with the leasehold estate and bind successors in title. Personal covenants—those that confer benefits or impose burdens unrelated to the parties’ interests in the land—do not run.

8. B. In Pillars Nigerian Limited v. Desbordes (2021), the Court of Appeal held that the right of re-entry and forfeiture must be exercised in strict compliance with the statutory procedural requirements, including the service of the prescribed notices. The Court further affirmed that a tenant who is able and willing to remedy the breach and compensate the landlord is entitled to apply for relief from forfeiture.

9. C. Estoppel is not a mode by which a lease may be determined. The recognised modes of determination include effluxion of time, notice to quit, surrender, merger, disclaimer, and forfeiture. Estoppel is a doctrine that may prevent a party from denying the existence or validity of a lease, but it does not operate to terminate a lease.

10. B. The habendum is the formal part of a lease that specifies the estate granted and the duration of the term. It commences with the words "TO HOLD" and defines the period for which the lease is to subsist. The reddendum reserves the rent; the recital sets out the background to the transaction; and the testimonium records the execution of the deed.

Legislation

Land Use Act 1978 (Cap. L5, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004).

Property and Conveyancing Law 1959 (Western Region, Cap. 100).

Conveyancing Act 1881 (44 & 45 Vict., c. 41) [received as statute of general application].

Recovery of Premises Act (Cap. R1, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004).

Lagos Tenancy Law 2011 (Lagos State).

Lagos Tenancy Law (Amendment) 2022 (Lagos State).

Land Registration Law 2015 (Lagos State).

Companies and Allied Matters Act 2020 (CAMA).

Nigerian Investment Promotion Commission Act 1995.

Stamp Duties Act (Cap. S8, Laws of the Federation 2004).

Evidence Act 2011.

Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act 2011 (as amended 2022).

Statute of Frauds 1677 (29 Car. II, c. 3) [received as statute of general application].

Case Law

Nigerian Properties Co Ltd v. Doherty (Supreme Court of Nigeria).

Pillars Nigerian Limited v. Desbordes (2021) (Court of Appeal).

Savannah Bank of Nigeria Ltd v. Ajilo (1989) 1 NWLR (Pt. 97) 305 (Supreme Court of Nigeria).

Thomas v. Holder (1946) 18 NLR 132.

Walsh v. Lonsdale (1882) 21 Ch D 9 (Court of Appeal, England).

Regulatory Instruments

Central Bank of Nigeria, Revised Guidelines for Primary Mortgage Banks (2014, as amended).

Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners (2007).

Code of Conduct, Nigerian Institution of Estate Surveyors and Valuers.

Code of Mortgage Practice, Mortgage Banking Association of Nigeria (2021).

Central Bank of Nigeria, Anti-Money Laundering and Combating the Financing of Terrorism (AML/CFT) Guidelines.

Secondary Sources

Oluyede, P. A. O. (1998). Nigerian Land Law and Conveyancing. Ibadan: Evans Brothers.

Nwogugu, E. I. (2020). Law of Real Property in Nigeria (2nd edn). Lagos: University of Lagos Press.

Olawoye, C. O. (1974). Title to Land in Nigeria. Lagos: Evans Brothers.

Sagay, I. E. (2015). Nigerian Law of Contract (3rd edn). Ibadan: Spectrum Books.

Oshio, P. E. (2006). Principles of Nigerian Land Law. Lagos: Mbeyi & Associates.

Oniekoro, B. O. (2019). “Landlord-Tenant Relations in Lagos: A Critical Appraisal of the Tenancy Law 2011.” Lagos State University Law Journal, 7(1), 112–138.

Akinbola, T. R. (2023). “Rent Review Mechanisms in Nigerian Commercial Leases: Law and Practice.” Nigerian Bar Journal, 11(1), 89–116.

Lagos State Lands Bureau (2024). Property Transaction Statistics 2020–2024. Lagos.

FCT Land Administration Department (2024). Land Administration Annual Report. Abuja.

Digital Research Platforms

Nigerian Legal Information Institute (NigeriaLII): www.nigerialii.org

Law Pavilion: www.lawpavilion.com

Mondaq: www.mondaq.com

Document Metadata

Course: Module 3 – Mortgage, Real Estate Laws & Regulations in Nigeria (Part A)

Lesson: Lesson 12 – Leases

Word Count: Approximately 5,000+ words

Institution: IMBL of Nigeria

Format: LMS-ready certification material

Date: April 2026

IMBL Nigeria Certification | Page