Supreme Court Ruling Does Not Affect 1912 Tinubu Estate Judgment — Lawyer
By Ranti Thomas
A Lagos-based legal practitioner, Barrister Ozemhoya Jude Jibril Ozemhoya, has stated that the recent Supreme Court judgment involving the Lagos State Government, the Federal Government, and the National Inland Waterways Authority (NIWA) does not affect the ownership rights attached to the historic Tinubu Estate.
In a legal advisory issued on the matter, Ozemhoya explained that the Supreme Court decision dealt strictly with the powers of government agencies over lands located near waterways and did not address the issue of land ownership.
According to him, the landmark 1912 judgment in Fafunmi v. Osu Apena & Others remains valid and continues to serve as the root of title for lands traced to the estate of Madam Iyalode Efunroye Tinubu.
He noted that the 1912 judgment was a court determination of ownership and proprietary rights over lands acquired by Madam Tinubu and can only be overturned by a court of competent jurisdiction.
The lawyer stressed that the recent Supreme Court ruling and the 1912 judgment deal with two completely different legal issues.
While the 1912 judgment establishes ownership and title to land, he explained that the recent Supreme Court ruling merely defines the extent of governmental regulatory authority over lands adjoining waterways.
He therefore argued that the latest decision neither invalidates nor weakens ownership rights already recognised by the courts in favour of the Tinubu Estate.
According to Ozemhoya, the ruling may even strengthen the position of estate owners and successors-in-title because it confirms that lands located near waterways do not automatically fall under the control of federal agencies.
He said this position is particularly important for lands within the Tinubu Estate that are situated around waterfronts, lagoons, and creek-adjacent areas across Lagos.
The legal advisory further stated that where ownership is traced through Madam Efunroye Tinubu’s original acquisition, the 1912 court judgment, subsequent probate proceedings, trusteeship arrangements, registered powers of attorney, and conveyancing documents, the Supreme Court ruling can be relied upon as additional constitutional support for such title.
The lawyer also referenced the registered Power of Attorney in favour of Adamakin Investment & Works Limited as part of the chain of title connected to the estate.
He maintained that the recent judgment provides protection against what he described as unconstitutional attempts by federal agencies to exercise proprietary control over lands intended for non-navigational purposes.
Ozemhoya concluded that the 1912 Tinubu Estate judgment remains enforceable and retains its full evidential value despite the recent Supreme Court ruling.
He added that both judgments can now be cited together in future transactions, litigation, financing arrangements, and due diligence exercises involving lands deriving title from the Estate of Madam Iyalode Efunroye Tinubu.
According to him, the two decisions work hand in hand, with one confirming ownership rights and the other protecting the constitutional exercise and enjoyment of those rights.