TABLE OF CONTENTS

Cover page
Title page
Declaration Certification Dedication Acknowledgments Table
of Contents Table of Abbreviations Table of Cases
Table of Statutes
Abstract

Chapterization
Preliminary pages
Format of writing for Chapter one
Introduction (1.1)--Background to the study
explain motivation to choose the topics and what I intend to do
1.2 Statement of the problem (no s) the lacuna in my topic that
has not been done
Talk about what has been done and what my work intends to do
Chapter one will be bold
But subtile will not be in caps (caps in Background to the Study
will be B and S others )
1.3 Aim and Objectives of the Study
1.4 Methodology of the Study
1.5 Scope and Limitations of the Study
1.6 Significance of the Study
1.7 Organizational layout
1.8 Definition of Key Terms
Abstract comes last after the work is done
 CHAPTER TWO --Literature Review
4
‌Review text relating to the work
‌No citation of cases and statutory provision comes in here
‌What To Do
‌Citing Textbooks that has to do with what I'm writing
2.1 Conceptual Frame Work
2.2 Theoretical frame work (check theories of law that support
my argument: sociological or naturalist or utilitarian )
2.3 Review of Related Literature
2.4 Summary of Review
CHAPTER THREE
3.1 Legal framework; Laws Relating to the Subject matter

3.2 Institutional framework

CHAPTER FOUR
4.1 EFFECTS AND IMPLICATIONS OF RENT CONTROL
4.2 CHALLENGES TO THE EFFECT AND IMPLICATIONS
OF RENT CONTROL
CHAPTER FIVE
5.1 Summary
5.2 Conclusion
5.3 Recommendations
Bibliography
Textbook in Italics
Footnotes

1
 LIST OF STATUTES

1. Rent Control and Recovery of Residential Premises Law

(Lagos State)
2. Tenancy Law of Lagos State, 2011
3. Recovery of Premises Act (Federal Law)
4. Urban and Regional Planning Act (Federal Law)
5. National Housing Fund Act (NHF Act)
6. Land Use Act, 1978
7. Landlord and Tenant Law of Delta State
8. Landlord and Tenant Law of Oyo State
9. Landlord and Tenant Law of Edo State
10. Landlord and Tenant Law of Abuja (FCT)

LIST OF CASES
Here is a list of the cases in capital letters:

1. **AFRICAN PETROLEUM LTD. V OWODUNNI (1991) 8

NWLR (PT. 210) 391**
2. **IHENACHO V UZOCHUKWU (1997) 2 NWLR (PT. 487)
257**
3. **AYINKE STORES LTD. V ADEBOGUN (2008) 10
NWLR (PT. 1095) 254**

2
 4. **LAGOS STATE DEVELOPMENT AND PROPERTY
CORPORATION V FOREIGN FINANCE CORPORATION
(1987) 1 NWLR (PT. 50) 413**
5. **OSHODI V BALOGUN (1990) 6 NWLR (PT. 155) 260**
6. **AYINLA V BALOGUN (1990) 5 NWLR (PT. 148) 632**
7. **OGUNBIYI V ADEWUNMI (1988) 5 NWLR (PT. 93)
215**
8. **UNION BANK OF NIGERIA LTD. V OZIGI (1994) 3
NWLR (PT. 333) 385**
9. **BALOGUN V SALAMI (1998) 10 NWLR (PT. 568)
566**
10. **AGHENGHEN V WAGHOREGHOR (1974) 1 ALL
NLR 200**
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

- **NHF** – National Housing Fund

- **FCT** – Federal Capital Territory
- **LGA** – Local Government Area
- **RTA** – Rent Tribunal Act
- **RPL** – Rent Premises Law
- **LUA** – Land Use Act
- **URP Act** – Urban and Regional Planning Act
- **NHP** – National Housing Policy
- **FHA** – Federal Housing Authority
- **FMLHUD** – Federal Ministry of Lands, Housing, and
Urban Development

3
 - **FIRS** – Federal Inland Revenue Service
- **RPA** – Recovery of Premises Act
- **VAT** – Value Added Tax
- **GDP** – Gross Domestic Product
- **NGN** – Nigerian Naira
- **PPP** – Public-Private Partnership
- **ILO** – International Labour Organization
- **NBS** – National Bureau of Statistics

---

These abbreviations are relevant for referencing institutions,

laws, and economic terms related to rent control and housing
policy in Nigeria.

ABSTRACT
This project is a study on the **implications and challenges of rent
control in Nigeria**, focusing on the legal, economic, and social
dimensions of the country's housing market. The motivation for this study
stems from the increasing demand for affordable housing and the growing
concerns over tenant exploitation in major urban areas like Lagos, Abuja,
and Port Harcourt. Rent control, while intended to ensure housing
affordability and tenant protection, has faced significant implementation
barriers, making its effectiveness a subject of concern.

4
The aim of this study is to analyze the existing rent control framework,
assess its implications for tenants, landlords, and the broader economy,
and identify the key challenges that hinder its successful implementation.
The study employs a doctrinal method of research, relying on secondary
sources such as textbooks, judicial precedents, statutory provisions, and
academic literature to evaluate the legal and institutional structures
governing rent control in Nigeria.
The findings of this study reveal that, while rent control laws provide
some protections for tenants, they are often poorly enforced, leading to
tenant exploitation and informal market practices. Key challenges
identified include weak legal frameworks, institutional inefficiencies,
economic pressures, and landlord opposition. These challenges limit the
effectiveness of rent control, undermining its goal of providing affordable
and stable housing for low-income residents.
It is recommended in this study that Nigeria adopts a more standardized
and enforceable rent control policy across states, improves institutional
capacity for enforcement, and fosters better awareness among tenants of
their rights. Additionally, creating incentives for landlords to comply with
rent control laws can help ensure a more balanced rental housing market.

5
 CHAPTER 1

BACKGROUND OF STUDY
Urbanization in Nigeria has accelerated in recent years, driven by
economic opportunities, migration, and population growth. Cities like
Lagos, Abuja, and Port Harcourt are the focal points of this rapid
urbanization, attracting millions of Nigerians seeking better employment
prospects and higher standards of living. However, this urban boom has
not been matched by the availability of affordable housing. As demand
for housing continues to rise, so too have rental prices, leading to
widespread housing affordability issues. Rent control has been introduced
in many parts of Nigeria as a solution to stabilize rental prices and protect
tenants from exploitative practices. However, the effectiveness of rent
control policies remains contentious.

Historically, rent control was first introduced in Nigeria during the

colonial era and later became more widespread in the post-independence
period, as governments sought to address housing crises. The **Rent
Control and Recovery of Residential Premises Law** is one such policy
that aimed to protect tenants from arbitrary rent increases by capping rent
in certain areas. Despite these efforts, enforcement has been inconsistent,
and many argue that rent control has led to unintended negative
consequences, such as discouraging private sector investment in housing
and limiting the available rental stock.

6
This study explores the impact of rent control policies in Nigeria, with a
focus on major urban centers where these laws are most applicable. The
research seeks to understand how rent control has affected tenants,
landlords, and the housing market as a whole. It will also examine
alternative approaches to improving housing affordability, considering
lessons from other countries that have faced similar housing challenges.

The motivation behind this study is to contribute to the ongoing debate on

the viability of rent control as a long-term housing policy solution in
Nigeria. Given the country’s growing population and housing needs, it is
essential to critically assess whether rent control is achieving its goals or
if reforms are necessary to meet the housing needs of all Nigerians,
especially low-income earners.
Rent control is whatever form has its antecedent in history. Since the
creation of Lagos State in the 1970’s several attempts have been made to
arrest the social problem of escalating rent.
The first effort made in this regard was that by Brigadier General
Mobolaji Johnson’s administration which promulgated the Rent Control
and Recovery of Residential Premises Edict No. 9 of 1976. The rents
fixed by then were termed “standard and maximum rent” for all
categories of accommodation. Its spirit and subsequent enforcement were
geared towards easing pressure on tenants by reducing the rent on
residential accommodation.
The above edict was suspended by another law titled “Rent Control and
Recovery of Residential Premises (Amendment) Edict, 1986 which came
into force on 21st March, 1986. This edict just made some amendments
to section 4 and 14 of edict No.9 of 1976.
This was in consonance with the declaration of economic emergency by
federal military government. Since then there was no control of rents of

7
residential properties in the state. This did not achieve much due to lack
of adequate follow-up by the government to see to its implementation.
The cropping effect of the hyper-inflation and the lack of co-operation by
the landlords did no provide a suitable environment for the
implementation and execution of the provision of the edict.
The third attempt was in 1996. The Edict came into being in July 1996.
The edict provides for the establishment of rent tribunals for the
determination and control of standard rents of residential premises and for
other purposes incidental or connected therewith. It re-established rent
tribunals that were abolished in 1981. This edict was meant to take effect
from December 1st 1995, but was never implemented. The unfavourable
economic climate and lack of adequate machinery for implementation did
not create a conductive environment for the take-off of this edict. This
edict ended only on paper.
The last and latest Rent Control Provision was contained in the Rent
Control and Recovery of Residential Premises Edict No 6 of Lagos State
which came into force on the 21st of March, 1997. As at the late 1990’s,
it once again revisited the turbulent area of landlord and tenant
relationship in a society where different interest compete for recognition
and protection. This had been the edict available till date though it went
extinct over the years due to the change in the state’s power seats.

Since 1920 when the issue of rent Control was first addressed in the
colony of Lagos and subsequently in Lagos State fifty-three years after,
no balance of convenience has been struck between landlords and tenants.
Landlords continue to cling to the old concept of freedom of contract, a
concept strengthened by the forces of demand and supply in an open
market and from unnecessary restraints by the state. To tenants on the
other hand, the 20th century ushered in a new era in contractual relations,

8
the movement from contract to status strengthened by the international
crusade against exploitation and inhuman treatment of a party to the
contract who is not equal in status with the other, appear to provide
tenants with justification for state intervention.

In developed economies where rent is regulated such as in the United

States of America, France and Germany to mention but few, the argument
usually is that it is the responsibility of the state to assist the less
privileged tenants and protect them against the greed and rapacity of
landlords who might want to exploit their weak bargaining power to
extort unfair rents.
The argument is strengthened in the third world countries by the naked
fact of shortage of accommodation especially in urban centres coupled
with the absence of social security including the provision of housing for
the less privileged. But successive legislation on rent control in Lagos
State before 1997 proved an ineffective bulwark against the crushing
effect of excessive rent. The popular observation is that Government
cannot control rent over individual properties and that the rent of
accommodation like prices of commodities in the market must technically
and compulsorily respond to the dictates of the market operation of
supply and demand.

With the rising cost of building materials and the failure of successive
governments to shelter the masses at affordable rents, it is to be expected
that more people would chase fewer accommodation, thus paving way for
cut-throat competition by prospective tenants to secure an
accommodation and sometimes at their financial peril. The absence of an
effective monitoring team, the high level of illiteracy, and general lack of
awareness amongst the populace have thrown the masses into the cruel

9
hand of shylock landlords and made the tenants bemoan their
predicament with equanimity.
In recent time, particularly in the urban centres, there have been
numerous complaints of ill-treatments, oppression and massive
exploitation of tenants by some avaricious landlords who think that
tenants in their premises are slaves, apart from the exorbitant rents they
demand and receive before letting them in, some landlord go to the extent
of monitoring or even restricting the movement of tenants in their
premises.
Property law has shown immense concern and interest in the relationship
between landlords and tenants so much that the law has attempted to
regulate every aspect of the relationship from the creation of same and
recovery of premises from tenants.
But if successive government in the past tried and fail in their attempts to
regulate rent and in 1997, another regime deemed it fit to enact or re-
enact a rent control edict, perhaps the machinery of rent control demands
a re-valuation with a view to putting at rest the controversy surrounding
the introduction and sustenance of the institution on the landlord and
tenant relationship. But the question still remains, in that was this edict a
failure as others in the past?

---

#### **1.2 Statement of the Problem**

10
The problem that this study addresses is the gap between the intended
objectives of rent control laws in Nigeria and their real-world impact on
housing affordability and availability. Although rent control was designed
to protect tenants from excessive rent increases, its actual effects have
been mixed. In many cases, rent control has not been uniformly enforced,
leading to a situation where tenants in some regions benefit from price
regulation, while others, particularly those in informal settlements,
remain unprotected. Additionally, there is evidence to suggest that rent
control may be contributing to housing shortages by discouraging new
investment in rental properties, as landlords opt to sell properties or
convert them into short-term leases to avoid rent control restrictions.

Previous studies have generally focused on the broader issues of housing

policy in Nigeria, with limited attention paid to the specific effects of rent
control. This leaves a critical research gap in understanding the actual
benefits and drawbacks of rent control policies from the perspective of
different stakeholders. While many tenants support rent control for
providing stability, landlords and property developers often argue that it
stifles market growth and reduces the incentive to maintain or invest in
rental properties.

This research aims to fill this gap by conducting a detailed analysis of

Nigeria’s rent control laws, focusing on how they impact tenants,
landlords, and the broader housing market. The study will also explore
potential reforms that could make housing more affordable while
avoiding some of the unintended consequences of strict rent control
policies.

---

11
#### **1.3 Aim and Objectives of the Study**
The primary aim of this study is to evaluate the effects of rent control
policies on the Nigerian housing market, particularly in terms of their
impact on housing affordability, supply, and the behavior of landlords
and tenants. To achieve this aim, the study has outlined the following
specific objectives:

1. **To examine the legal framework governing rent control in

Nigeria**, with a particular focus on key cities such as Lagos, Abuja, and
Port Harcourt.
2. **To assess the implementation and enforcement** of rent control
policies in these cities and identify the challenges faced in enforcing these
laws.
3. **To evaluate the impact of rent control on housing affordability**,
with attention to both low-income and middle-income renters.
4. **To analyze the effects of rent control on housing supply** and the
incentives for landlords and property developers to invest in rental
housing.
5. **To explore alternative policy options** that could complement or
replace rent control to improve housing affordability while encouraging
investment in the housing market.

---

#### **1.4 Methodology of the Study**

This study will adopt a **doctrinal research method** by focusing on the
analysis of existing legal frameworks, statutes, and judicial decisions
related to rent control in Nigeria. The doctrinal method involves a critical

12
evaluation of the legal instruments that govern rent control, including
their interpretation and application by the courts.

In addition to legal analysis, the study will also employ a **qualitative

approach** to review secondary data from existing literature, including
academic papers, policy reports, and case studies. This will help provide a
comprehensive understanding of how rent control has been implemented
in Nigeria and its effects on various stakeholders. Furthermore, the study
will compare Nigeria’s rent control policies with those of other
developing countries that have implemented similar policies, such as
India, Brazil, and South Africa.

Sources of data will include:

- Nigerian statutes and judicial decisions on rent control.
- Academic literature and policy reports on housing and urban
development.
- Empirical studies and expert opinions on the economic and social
effects of rent control.

The research will focus on qualitative analysis rather than quantitative

data collection, as the primary aim is to assess the legal and policy
framework rather than to conduct large-scale statistical analysis.

---

#### **1.5 Scope and Limitations of the Study**

The scope of this study is limited to the analysis of rent control policies in
Nigeria, with a particular focus on Lagos and Abuja, the two largest
urban centers in the country. These cities have been chosen due to their

13
high population density, rapid urbanization, and the widespread
application of rent control laws.

While the study will provide a detailed legal and policy analysis, it is
limited by the availability of recent and reliable data on the informal
rental market, where many low-income tenants reside. In many cases,
informal rental agreements are not subject to rent control laws, which
could affect the generalizability of the study's findings. Another
limitation is the constantly evolving nature of housing policies in Nigeria,
as new legislative and policy developments may emerge during the
course of this research.

---

#### **1.6 Significance of the Study**

This study is significant because it addresses a critical issue in Nigeria's
urban development: housing affordability. With the increasing demand
for housing in major cities, rent control is seen as one of the few
mechanisms available to protect tenants from exorbitant rent increases.
However, the long-term sustainability of rent control policies has been
questioned by scholars, policymakers, and housing advocates alike.

The research findings will be valuable to policymakers who are tasked

with addressing the country’s housing crisis. By identifying the
challenges and limitations of current rent control laws, the study will
provide recommendations for reforming these policies to better serve
both tenants and landlords. In addition, the study will contribute to the
global literature on housing policy by providing insights into the unique

14
challenges faced by developing countries like Nigeria, where rapid
urbanization has outpaced infrastructure development.

---

#### **1.7 Organizational Layout

The research is organized into five chapters as follows:

- **Chapter One**: Introduces the study by providing the background,

statement of the problem, aims and objectives, methodology, scope,
limitations, and significance of the research.
- **Chapter Two**: Reviews the existing literature on rent control
policies, including theoretical frameworks, conceptual discussions, and
empirical studies related to housing affordability and government
intervention in rental markets.
- **Chapter Three**: Focuses on the legal framework of rent control in
Nigeria, analyzing relevant statutes, case law, and the institutional
mechanisms for enforcing these laws.
- **Chapter Four**: Provides a reappraisal of the previous chapters,
synthesizing the key findings and discussing the implications for housing
policy.
- **Chapter Five**: Summarizes the research findings, offers
conclusions, and provides recommendations for improving rent control
policies and addressing housing affordability issues.

---

15
 CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Conceptual Framework

The conceptual framework of this study is centered around the analysis of rent control as a
public policy intervention designed to address housing affordability and protect tenants from
exorbitant rent increases. Rent control, in its various forms, has been used globally as a
mechanism to regulate the rental housing market, but its effectiveness remains widely
debated.

At its core, rent control is a legal restriction placed on the amount landlords can charge
tenants for rent. The primary goal is to keep housing affordable for low- and middle-income
tenants in high-demand areas, where market-driven rent prices tend to exclude these groups
from adequate housing. However, rent control laws often vary in scope. Some policies
implement strict price ceilings, while others may allow modest rent increases tied to inflation
or the cost of living.

In Nigeria, rent control has been a response to the severe housing crisis faced by urban
populations. The housing market, particularly in cities like Lagos and Abuja, suffers from a
significant supply-demand imbalance. While urbanization continues at a rapid pace, the
development of affordable housing has lagged behind, resulting in an increase in rental costs
that disproportionately affects low-income families. Rent control policies have therefore
been implemented to counteract the negative social and economic consequences of this
situation.

Key concepts to explore within this framework include:

- Housing Affordability: Housing affordability is typically measured by the percentage of a

household's income that is spent on rent or mortgage payments. The affordability threshold
is commonly set at 30% of household income, meaning that housing costs beyond this
percentage are considered unaffordable. In Nigeria, many low-income households spend
more than 50% of their income on rent, making rent control a critical tool for reducing this
burden. However, housing affordability is also tied to factors such as wage levels,
employment rates, and the cost of living.

- Supply and Demand Dynamics: Rent control directly affects the supply and demand
dynamics of the housing market. When rents are artificially kept low, demand often exceeds
supply, resulting in housing shortages, especially in densely populated urban areas. The
conceptual challenge here is balancing the need for affordable housing with maintaining a
healthy housing market that incentivizes new construction and proper maintenance of rental
properties.

- Market Intervention and Regulation: Rent control is a form of market intervention where
the government steps in to regulate prices in a sector typically governed by market forces.

16
This raises debates about the role of government in the housing market—whether it should
protect vulnerable populations through rent control or allow the market to dictate prices,
which may attract more investment in the housing sector. Some argue that long-term market
intervention can lead to unintended consequences, such as a decline in the quality of
housing stock or a disincentive for landlords to maintain properties.

- Tenants' Rights and Landlord Interests: Rent control often highlights the conflict between
tenants' rights and landlords' interests. While tenants benefit from predictable and lower
rents, landlords argue that rent control limits their ability to profit from their investments
and maintain their properties. Landlords may also seek ways to bypass rent control through
informal agreements or by shifting the rental stock towards short-term leases, which are
typically exempt from control.

Understanding these concepts is crucial for evaluating the effects of rent control in Nigeria.
The study will focus on how these dynamics play out in the Nigerian context, where
enforcement of laws can be inconsistent, and the housing market is fragmented between
formal and informal sectors.

Accomodation
Section 36 (1) of the Lagos State Rent Control and Recovery of
Residential Premises Edict No. 6. 1997 defines accommodation to which
the law applies as follows.
“Accommodation includes approving authorities designation by the
state as residencies regardless of user all building used as residences as
from the commencement of this Edict and all other buildings whether
not approving authorities but used as residences.”

Webster’s New World Dictionary of the American Language defines

‘accommodation’ as lodgings; room and board.

Further down, subsection (1) defines “premises” to include “a house or

building or any part thereof together with its gardens or other
appurtenances.”

This definition can be segmented into three. First, is building approved by

the building authorizes to be used for residence. The statue would apply

17
to such a building irrespective of whether the building is used as a
warehouse other than residence.
Secondly, in anticipation of a situation where the landlords fails to obtain
building approval, the legislative further provides that the statue applies
to building used as residence whether or not the builder has obtained
planning authorities permit. Even where a building is designed and
approved as a shop, office or a place of worship but it is used as a
residence, the law would apply to it and where only part thereof is used as
residence, the law would apply to that part.
For the definition of “residence” we may adopt that preferred by the
authoritative Jowitt’s Dictionary English law, namely, “an abode where
an individual eats, drinks and sleeps or where his family or his servants
eat, drinks and sleep.”

THE MEANING OF LANDLORD

The Webster’s New World dictionary of the American Language defines
a landlord as a man who rents or leases land, houses etc to others. It went
further to say, he is a man who keeps a rooming house, inn etc.

STATUTORY DEFINITION OF LANDLORD

By the provision of section 36 (1) of the Rent Control and Recovery of
Residential Premises Edict (No.6) of 1997 of Lagos State, a “Landlord”,
in relation to any premises, means “the person entitled to the immediate
reversion of the premises or if the property therein is held in joint tenancy
or tenancy in common, any of the persons entitles to the immediate
reversion and includes:
 The attorney or agent of any such landlord; or
 Any person receiving (whether in his own right or as an attorney or
agent) any rent from any person for the occupation of any

18
 accommodation in respect of which he claims a right to receive the
same.”

DEFINITION OF TENANT
A tenant according to Webster’s Dictionary is a person who pays rent to
occupy or use land, a building etc. where a person is granted the use of
premises with the grantor retaining some provisionary interest in that
property; the grantee may either be a licensee or a tenant. A licensee is
one who is permitted to enter into or remain on the property of another in
such circumstances that if the permission were absent, the occupier would
be a trespasser.
A tenant on the other hand, acquires an estate in the property. He enjoys
the property as of right. Unlike the licensee who occupies at the pleasure
of the landowner, the tenant is entitled to the property and can retain
possession even in the face of the most vehement objection to it by the
landlord.

STATUTORY DEFINITION OF TENANT

Section 36 (1) of the Lagos State Rent Control and Recovery Premises
Edict No. 6 1997 defines a “tenant” as including a sub-tenant or any
person occupying any premises whether on payment of rent or otherwise
but does not include a person occupying premises under a bonafide claim
to be the owner thereof.

TENANCIES
Normally, a tenancy could be taken to mean the same as a lease, but
under the law, tenancies are slightly different from leases in the sense that

19
it could be from week to week (weekly tenant), month to month (monthly
tenant), quarter to quarter or from year to year (quarterly or yearly
tenants) and where it is for 3 years and upwards, it implies a lease and the
law requires that the agreement must be stamped and registered. Tenancy
can go on for an indefinite period determined by either party giving
notice i.e. there is ‘no time certain’ in tenancies.

TYPES OF TENANCIES

Tenancies for less than a year:

A tenancy from week to week or month to month or other short periods is
similar to tenancy from year to year except that the length of notice is
related to the periodic interval.

Tenancy from year to year:

Tenancy from year to year is one which continues until determined by
notice at the end of the first or any subsequent years and may be created
by express grant or by necessary implication from the facts of the
occupation. A letting stated to be at a yearly rent is likely to be a tenancy
from year to year.

Tenancy at sufferance:
A tenancy at sufferance arises where a person who has occupation by a
lawful title continues in possession after his title has terminated without
any statutory right to retain possession at the end of a fixed term and/or
without the consent of the landlord. He may be evicted at anytime after
proper notice is given. At common law, a tenant at sufferance has no
liability to pay rent for the period holding over. Where rent is paid and

20
accepted, there may well be a presumption that the tenancy has become a
periodic tenancy. ADEJUMO vs DAVID HUGHES & CO. LTD (1989) 5
NWLR (PT.120) 146 C.A.

Periodic tenancy:
Periodic tenancy is the commonest form of tenural system in Nigeria. The
terms which a periodic tenancy may be limited are principally - yearly,
quarterly, monthly or weekly. However, there is nothing to stop parties
from contracting for terms outside these conventional periods. In Land
settlement Association vs. Carr (1944) 2 ALL ER 126, a tenancy for a
period of 364 days and then for a further period of 364 days and
thereafter for a successive periods of 36 days is a periodic tenancy.
Periodic tenancy is in substances a tenancy at will because it subsists as
long as the parties consent to the arrangement.

Tenancy at will:
In definition, Littleton said “tenancy at will is where land or tenements
are let by one to another, to have and to hold him at the will of the lessor,
by force of which lease, the lessee is in possession… the lessee is called
tenant at will, because he hath no certain or sure estate, for the lessor may
put him out at what time it pleases him”. (Quoted from McGarry and
Wade, “the law of Real property”, pg. 45. 4th Edition).
This involves tenure i.e. a relationship of landlord and tenant though
without a definite term.

Sub-tenancy:
A sub-tenancy is granted by a tenant where he transfers his interest in the
property to a third-party while retaining a reversion. If he transfers all the

21
interest he has in the property, the transaction is an assignment. For
example, if the tenant has an un-expired tem of 22years and he transfers
any term – even if one day lesser than that to a 3 rd party, that is sub-
tenancy. If he transfers the whole residue of the term, that constitutes an
assignment of the lease. A sub-tenancy may also arise where a tenant
sublets part of the premises while he retains possession of the remaining
part. It is immaterial that the sub-tenants term is of the same duration as
the tenants. Thus, a monthly tenant of two shops who grants a monthly
tenancy over one shop while he retains possession of the other thereby
creates a sub-tenancy. DABIRA VS ADELAJA (1973) 11 66 HCJ 97

Relationship between landlord and sub-tenant:

Where the sub-tenancy is in contravention of the covenant against sub-
letting, as between the tenant and the grantee, the latter is a sub-tenant
and the transaction is valid as between the parties to it. But as between
the landlord and the sub-tenant, the latter is a trespasser where the
transaction is in breach of covenant against subletting.
Where the sublease is valid, the subtenant acquires exclusive possession
of the premises against the whole world including the landlord. The sub-
tenant derives his title from the tenant.
Where the landlord seeks to recover possession of premises which have
been sub-let, the sub-tenant is not entitled to a notice to quit. It is
sufficient that the tenant’s interest is terminated by a valid notice.

2.2 DEFINITION OF RENT

Rent is a retribution or compensation for the lands demised. It is defined
to mean a certain profit issuing yearly on land and tenements corporeal
and may be regarded as of a twofold nature: first, as something issuing
out of the land , as a compensation for the possession during the term;

22
and secondly, as an acknowledgment made by the tenant to the landlord
of his fealty or tenure.
Rent must always be a profit; but there is no occasion for it to be, as it
usually is a sum of money for spurs, capons, horses, corn and other
matters that may need be and occasionally are rendered by the way of
rent. It may also consist in services and manual operations as to plough so
many acres of land and the like, which services in the eye of law are
profits. This profits must also be certain or capable of being reduced to a
certainty by either party and must issue out of the thing granted and not
be part of the land, or thing itself, where in it differs from an exception in
the grant, which is always part of the thing granted. i.e. rents are meant
for the occupation of land and not for the alienation of such land. But a
royalty payable to a landlord upon the bricks which are made out of a
brickfield is a rent, although it is not paid for the produce of the land,
which is periodically renewed, but for portions of the land itself, which is
gradually exhausted by the working.

There are at Common Law three sorts of rents:

 Rent-service: it was so called because it had some corporeal

service incident to it as at the least fealty or demise. Every
copyhold rent was, and every rent reserved on a lease is a rent-
service.

 Rent-charge: a rent-charge is where land is charge with a rent by

deed or will with power to distrain for the same, but the owner of
the rent has no reversion in the land: as where a person conveys to
another, land in fee simple, reserving certain rent payable there-
out, with a clause that if the rent be in arrear for a specified number

23
 of days it shall be lawful to distrain for the same. In such case, the
land is liable to the distress, not of common right, but by virtue of
the clause in the deed, and therefore it is called a rent-charge
because in this manner the land is charged with a distress for the
payment of it. A power of distress is given by the Law of Property
Act, 1925, s. 121, in the case of any annual sum charged on land.

 Rent-seck or barren rent: is in effect nothing more than a rent

reserved by deed or will, but without any clause of distress and
differs from a rent-charge only in being reserved without a clause
of distress. A rent-seck cannot be issued out of a term of years. A
right to distrain for rent-seck as in the case of rents reserved upon
lease and also for rent of assize and chief rents, is given by the
Landlord and Tenant Act, 1730 (4 Geo. 2, c. 28).

Other forms of rents are:

 Fee-farm rent: is a rent-charge reserved on a grant in fee, the name
is founded on the perpetuity of the rent or service and not on the
amount.

 Rents of assize: are the certain established rents of the freeholders

and ancient copyholders of a manor, and which cannot be departed
from. Those of the freeholders are frequently called Chief-rents
and both sorts were indifferently denominated quit-rents, because
thereby the tenant goes quit and free of all other services.

 Peppercorn rent: is a nominal rent not intended to be paid but

stipulated for on the view (which is not correct) that the reservation
of some rent is necessary to constitute a lease. It is most frequently
found in building leases in which it is usually reserved for the first

24
 few years of the term only, during which the houses to be built will
be in course of erection and therefore not yet profitable to the
lessee.

 Rack-rent: is a rent of the full annual value of the tenement or near

it. It is to be determined according to the value at the time of
letting.

2.3 RENT CONTROL

DEFINITION: According to Linn (1983), “Rent Control” means
regulatory tools imposed by the government to restrain rents where they
have risen rapidly as a result of urban growth and the failure of housing
supply to keep up with the demand for housing. Its imposition is seen as
an attempt in ensuring that housing costs and benefits are more equitably
distributed, that circumstances which discriminate against the
underprivileged are eliminated and that the level of unfairness in housing
supply be reduced.
Rent Control can also be defined as a policy designed to protect tenants
from the cut-throat market rents which are as a result of the shortage in
supply of tenement housing. The policy usually involves the specifying of
the maximum rent that the landlord can charge on the tenant.

HISTORY: Rent standardizations as a form of regulatory policy is by no

means new. It was first introduced in the Europe during the First World
War. Rent Controls have continued to be applied in different forms as
dictated by the exigencies of the times in different countries. In Britain,
Rent Controls were in force for over 90years since 1914 and over this
period, more than eleven (11) legislations were being passed. In the
United States, Rent Controls were imposed as temporary measures
sporadically, first during the First World War, then during World War II,

25
which they endured till 1954 when it was lifted, but only to be re-imposed
again as an anti-inflationary measure in 1971 and 1972. Rent Control has
been a common feature in government housing policies since the early
forties in most of the third world countries including Nigeria.

TYPES: Generally, Rent Controls range from a rent freeze to

restrictions on the rates of rentals. As explained by GILBERT A. and
VARLEY A. (1991), rent freezes are usually introduced in four
situations:
1. When the country enters into a war;
2. As a remedy for falling living standards;
3. At a time when the economy is suffering from severe inflation; or
4. As part of a general policy aimed at holding down wages.

2.2 Theoretical Framework

The theoretical framework of this study draws upon various legal and economic theories that
explain the rationale for rent control and its implications on the housing market. These
theories offer a lens through which to understand the competing interests of tenants,
landlords, and the government, as well as the broader societal goals of rent control policies.

Sociological Theories

Sociological theories provide the foundation for many rent control policies, especially in
contexts where housing is seen as a fundamental right. The idea that everyone deserves
access to decent, affordable housing is central to sociological perspectives on rent control.
Housing is not only a commodity but also a social good that contributes to the well-being of
individuals and communities. In this view, rent control is justified as a means of protecting
vulnerable populations—such as low-income families, the elderly, and young people entering
the workforce—from the predatory practices of landlords who exploit high demand to
increase rents excessively.

One key sociological theory relevant to rent control is the **Social Justice Theory**. This
theory argues that rent control is a tool to ensure equitable distribution of housing
resources, particularly in urban areas where the gap between rich and poor is most
pronounced. According to this perspective, the government has a responsibility to intervene

26
in the housing market to prevent social inequality and ensure that even the most
disadvantaged members of society have access to safe and affordable housing. This theory
will be used to assess how rent control in Nigeria aligns with broader goals of social justice,
especially in the context of rapid urbanization and economic inequality.

Economic Theories

Economic theories of rent control focus on its impact on the housing market and question
the long-term sustainability of such policies. Critics argue that rent control distorts the
natural equilibrium of supply and demand, leading to unintended consequences such as
housing shortages and deterioration in housing quality. According to classical economic
theory, price controls—whether on goods or services—tend to reduce the incentive for
producers (in this case, landlords) to offer those goods or services.

Supply-Side Theory holds that when rent is capped below the market equilibrium, landlords
may withdraw their properties from the rental market, invest less in maintenance, or shift
their investment to other more profitable sectors. Additionally, new construction may be
discouraged because developers fear that future rent controls could limit their return on
investment. In this view, rent control is seen as a short-term solution that creates long-term
problems in the housing market.

On the other hand, Behavioral Economics suggests that landlords and tenants do not always
behave as purely rational actors. Rent control may provide stability for tenants, allowing
them to invest in their local communities and build stronger social ties, which could have
positive long-term benefits for society. This theory will be used to evaluate whether rent
control policies in Nigeria help tenants establish more permanent living conditions and
contribute to community development.

Natural Law Theories

Natural law theories assert that certain rights, including the right to housing, are inherent
and should be protected by law. Proponents of rent control from a natural law perspective
argue that everyone has an inherent right to shelter, and that housing should not be left
solely to market forces, which often prioritize profit over human dignity. The Right to Housing
is seen as a fundamental human right that governments are obligated to protect, especially
in the face of market failures that leave a significant portion of the population without
adequate shelter.

In this framework, rent control is viewed as a moral imperative, ensuring that even the
poorest citizens have access to housing. This theory will be employed to analyze how
Nigerian rent control policies align with international human rights norms and whether these
policies fulfill the government’s obligation to ensure adequate housing for all its citizens.

Utilitarian Theories
Utilitarianism focuses on the greatest good for the greatest number, and rent control can be
justified if it results in overall social welfare. The Utilitarian Theory of Law suggests that
policies should be evaluated based on their consequences for society as a whole. Rent
control can be seen as beneficial if it promotes greater societal welfare by making housing
more accessible to a larger portion of the population, even if it comes at the cost of reduced
profits for landlords.

Utilitarianism also allows for a cost-benefit analysis of rent control policies. From this
perspective, the costs of rent control (such as reduced housing supply and potential

27
disincentives for landlords) must be weighed against the benefits (such as housing stability
for low-income tenants and prevention of homelessness). This theory will guide the study in
evaluating whether the overall benefits of rent control in Nigeria outweigh its potential
drawbacks.

Regulatory Theories

Regulatory Theory focuses on the role of government in correcting market failures and
promoting public interest. Rent control can be viewed as a regulatory measure designed to
correct the market's failure to provide affordable housing for all. In highly urbanized and
populated cities like Lagos and Abuja, rent control may be necessary to curb market abuses
and ensure fair treatment of tenants. However, regulatory theory also raises questions about
the efficacy of government intervention and the potential for rent control policies to be
manipulated or poorly enforced, leading to unintended consequences such as corruption,
inefficiency, and favoritism.

This theoretical framework will be used to assess how effectively the Nigerian government
has implemented and enforced rent control policies and whether regulatory bodies have
been able to balance the interests of tenants, landlords, and the housing market at large.

2.3 Review of Related Literature

The review of related literature provides a comprehensive understanding of rent control

from various perspectives—legal, economic, and social. This section will examine prior
research conducted on rent control, both globally and within the Nigerian context. It will
identify key debates in the literature, assess empirical studies on the effects of rent control,
and highlight gaps that this study seeks to address.

The concept of rent control is not new and has its roots in early 20th-century housing crises,
particularly during and after World War I and II. Rent control policies were originally
designed as emergency measures to protect tenants from the steep increase in rent caused
by housing shortages. In countries such as the United States, the United Kingdom, and parts
of Europe, rent control was a temporary response to these crises but eventually became a
more permanent fixture in many housing markets.

Nigeria's historical experience with rent control also emerged during periods of housing
shortages, particularly in the post-independence era when rapid urbanization led to
increased demand for housing. The Rent Control and Recovery of Residential Premises Law,
which was introduced in various states, sought to curb excessive rent increases and ensure
that low-income tenants could access affordable housing. The legal history of rent control in
Nigeria reveals that while these laws were intended to protect tenants, they have often faced
challenges in enforcement, particularly in informal settlements where much of the urban
population resides.

Literature on the historical evolution of rent control highlights a recurring tension between
protecting tenants and stimulating investment in the housing market. This tension remains
central to contemporary debates about the role of rent control in modern housing policy.

A significant portion of the literature on rent control focuses on its economic impacts,
particularly in terms of housing supply, rental prices, and market distortions. According to
classic economic theory price controls (including rent control) interfere with the natural
dynamics of supply and demand, often leading to unintended negative consequences.

28
Scholars like Jenkins and Smith (1991) argue that rent control discourages new investment in
the housing market, as developers and landlords perceive capped rental prices as insufficient
for a return on their investment. This, in turn, leads to housing shortages and the
deterioration of the existing housing stock, as landlords may neglect maintenance and
repairs in response to limited profits. This phenomenon has been observed in various
jurisdictions, including New York City, where strict rent control laws led to a sharp decline in
new construction and rental availability over time.

On the other hand, proponents of rent control argue that these policies are necessary to
protect vulnerable populations from exploitation, particularly in high-demand urban areas
where housing affordability is a serious concern. Studies such as Arnott (1995) argue that
rent control can provide housing stability, reduce displacement, and foster community
cohesion. For low-income tenants, rent control often represents the only safeguard against
escalating rents in rapidly gentrifying neighborhoods. The literature also highlights how rent
control can reduce housing cost burdens, allowing tenants to allocate their income towards
other necessities such as food, healthcare, and education.

In the Nigerian context, the literature on the economic effects of rent control is relatively
sparse, with few empirical studies assessing its long-term impacts. However, anecdotal
evidence suggests that rent control laws in cities like Lagos and Abuja have not been as
effective as intended. In many cases, landlords have found ways to circumvent these laws,
either through informal rental agreements or by converting properties into short-term
leases, which are typically exempt from rent control restrictions. Ikejiofor (1999) argues that
one of the major limitations of rent control in Nigeria is the inconsistent enforcement of
these laws, particularly in informal settlements where landlords operate outside the purview
of government regulations.

Moreover, several studies have pointed to the potential social impacts of rent control,
particularly in terms of housing inequality. For example, rent control may disproportionately
benefit middle-income tenants who can secure long-term leases in rent-controlled units,
while low-income tenants, who are often relegated to informal housing markets, remain
unprotected. This creates a dual housing market where the formal, rent-controlled sector
benefits a relatively small portion of the population, while the majority continues to face
unaffordable rents in unregulated sectors.

The law relating to landlord and tenant relationship has come to be one of
the most extensive and far-reaching branches of law today. Its origin lay
in the dim past when man first started to distinguish between “thine” and
“mine” and though its significance may not be of equal importance in all
states, yet even in Russia where land belongs to the state, personal rights
in houses with the use of a small plot of land attached thereto and the
inheritance thereof, are recognized by law.

The relationship of landlord and tenant may be described as the

relationship which exists between the parties to demise and between their

29
respective assigns. The relationship is one of tenure, and although in
former times it existed between freeholds, where the owner of a freehold,
granted there-out a lesser estate of his freehold rights (such as an estate
for life). In practice at the present day, the relationship of landlord and
tenant arises where the owner of an estate in land grants to another an
estate lesser than the freehold and/or lesser than what he himself
possesses in the land

Generally, in most systems of law, and in particular in Anglo-American

systems, the relationship of landlord and tenant is created by contract,
expressed or implied, but it may also be created by statute.
The general rule in English Law is that the relationship of the landlord
and tenant arises when a lessor confers on a lessee exclusive possession
of the land demised for a period of time which is either definite or which
can be made subject to a definite time limit by either parties. The lease
must have a certain beginning and certain end otherwise it will be invalid,
and it is this which marks the essential difference between a tenancy in
Customary Law and the one under English Law and the General Law of
Nigeria.

In Customary Law, the tenancy may be for a definite or indefinite period.

The emphasis in Customary Law is on the intention of the parties. It is
this intention which in a broad sense, determines the duration of the
tenancy. If, for example, it is intended that the grantee shall use the land
for growing seasonal crops, this is prima facie evidence that the tenancy
is meant to last for a short period or for a planting season, unless it is
expressly stated otherwise. If on the other hand, it is intended that the
land be used for building a dwelling house or for kola or cocoa plantation,

30
the tenancy will be presumed to be for a long period and indefinite in
duration.

Although the relationship in English law is not the same as it is in

Customary Law, it affords a useful basis of comparison. The relationship
may be described as that which exists between parties to demise and their
respective assigns. The relation may thus be simplified to mean that
which exists when a person (lessor or landlord) being possessed of an
estate or interest in real property, whether freehold or not has granted, or
is deemed to have granted, to another (lessee or tenant) an estate or
interest therein which is less than a freehold or less than the estate of the
grantor.

It is true to say that in Nigerian Customary Law, as in English Law, the

landlord always grants to the tenant an interest less than that which the
landlord himself has in the land, but the above descriptions do not fit
squarely into the context of Customary Law not only because of the
absence of freehold but because the description fits other transactions,
like pledge of land, which do not give rise to the relationship of landlord
and tenant.
Thus:
“A term of years and the relation of landlord and tenant is created
whenever one person, called the landlord, confers upon another,
called the tenant, the rights to exclusively possession and/or take
into occupation of certain land for a period that is definite or
capable of definition and which is also less than the rights the
landlord holds so as to allow time for reversion.”

31
Explaining the rationale of any Rent Control Legislation, OPUTA J. S.
C. in ODUYE vs. NIGERIAN AIRWAYS observed that:

“The general principle of the Rent Acts has always been to guard
against the social and economic evils generated by shortage of
housing and the greed and rapacity of some landlords who
increase rent and try to evict tenants who refuse or are unable to
pay the higher rents demanded.”

The Rent Acts have throughout their history constituted an interference

with the Contract and Property Rights for a specific purpose, i.e. the
redress of the balance of the advantages enjoyed in the world of housing
by landlords over their tenants in era of shortage supply. The socialistic
school of thought opined that housing being a basic essential need of man
should not be left to the whim and caprices of the landlords. Thus, the
State owes it a duty, under the Social Contract Theory of her citizens, to
ensure that her citizens are properly sheltered in affordable and decent
accommodation.

Shortly after World War II, the legislature in Nigeria realised that tenants
could not be left at the mercy of their landlords who naturally would want
to exercise their freedoms to the limits in the face of acute shortage in
housing supply. One of the obvious manifestations of the present urban
crisis in Nigeria is the soaring rents for residential accommodation. This
arises due to the gap between the demand and the supply of decent
residential accommodations. One of the main reasons for the anti-social
rents for residential accommodation in the major urban centres in the
country is this continuously widening gap between the supply and the
demand for houses at rents the masses can afford. Thus, the Federal
Government and the State governments promulgated different Rent
Control Edicts as applied to the different states.

32
Factors which precipitated the enactment of the Rent Control Edict in
Lagos State in 1973 were the cumulative effect of certain socio-economic
problems following the aftermath of the Nigerian Civil War. People from
the various war-torn areas migrated to the less affected areas like Lagos
in view of starting life again, thereby aggravated pressure on the limited
available accommodations supplied. Thus, gave the landlords the
opportunity to hike rent. The level of inflation and government’s ill-
advised policy of making ex-gratia payment (UDOJI AWARDS) without
increase in goods and services led to the rise in the cost of the
consequential increase in the rent of residential properties. Absence of
concrete policy on housing despite the population explosion in urban
centres provided an opportunity for the exploitation with the landlords
calling the bluff of prospective tenants and providing accommodation
only to the highest bidders.

The inability of the tenants in occupation of residential properties to pay

the cut-throat rent demanded by landlords led to a flood-gate of abuses of
the Common Law’s right to disdain for rent. Many tenants were victims
of the unfortunate incidents of distress for rent and lost valuable
properties of theirs as the painful price for their financial disability and
absence of legal protection.

The period also coincided with the dangerous trend mounting and
following from the greed of many landlords to insist on twelve or more
months rent in advance and as it dawn on landlords that such rent could
be gotten from many tenants in occupation. A new dimension was
therefore sought by these landlords using frequently the Recovery of
Premises all purely for their financial spur. Thus, the absence of defined
Legislation on the security of tenancy provided an opportunity for these
landlords to terminate tenancy without any legitimate impetus.

33
It was in the course of these crises that the first Rent Control Edict was
enacted in 1973. The edict established tribunals for the determination of
standard rents payable by tenants irrespective of the residential
accommodation and provided for security of tenancy, restriction of
ejection and distress for rent. This edict was consolidated by the Rent
Control and Recovery of Residential Premises Edict No. 9, 1976
promulgated during Brigadier General Mobolaji Johnson’s
administration. The rent then fixed were termed “standard and maximum
rent” for all categories of accommodation. Its spirit and subsequent
enforcement were geared towards easing pressure on tenants by reducing
the rent payable on residential accommodation.

The 1976 edict was later repealed by the Rent Control and Recovery of
Residential Premises (Amendment) Edict 1986. It was promulgated on
the 21st day of March, 1986. The edict only made amendments to sections
4 and 14 of Edict No. 9. 1976. Though, the third attempt was in 1986, it
never came into force until July 1996.

CHAPTER 3

LEGAL AND INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK

.1 INTRODUCTION

34
This section delves into the legal structure that governs rent control in Nigeria, highlighting
key statutes, case law, and the historical context of rent control legislation in the country.

The legal framework for rent control in Nigeria is shaped by a combination of federal and
state-level legislation, which has evolved over the years in response to the growing demand
for affordable housing, particularly in urban centers like Lagos, Abuja, and Port Harcourt. This
chapter critically examines the major laws governing rent control in Nigeria, the scope of
their application, and the challenges in enforcing these laws. It also explores the interaction
between rent control laws and other property laws, and how this legal framework has
impacted both landlords and tenants.

3.1.1 Historical Development of Rent Control Legislation in Nigeria

Rent control laws in Nigeria have their origins in the post-colonial period when the country
experienced significant urban migration. As cities like Lagos became hubs of economic
activity, a sharp increase in demand for housing led to rising rental prices, which
disproportionately affected low-income populations. In response, rent control legislation was
introduced to protect tenants from exploitative rent increases and arbitrary evictions.

The first rent control legislation in Nigeria was enacted under British colonial rule. The
**Rent Restriction Act of 1941** was introduced as a temporary measure during World War
II to address housing shortages. This law aimed to freeze rents at pre-war levels, limiting the
ability of landlords to raise rents during the housing crisis. However, this early legislation was
poorly enforced and primarily applied to select urban areas.

After independence, the Nigerian government continued to grapple with housing challenges
as rapid urbanization led to overcrowding and an inadequate supply of affordable rental
housing. Rent control laws were gradually extended and modified by state governments,
with varying degrees of success in implementation.

3.1.2 The Rent Control and Recovery of Residential Premises Laws (RCRRPL)

In the post-independence period, state-level rent control laws emerged as a response to the
growing housing crisis in major cities. One of the most prominent pieces of legislation in this
area is the Rent Control and Recovery of Residential Premises Law (RCRRPL), which governs
the relationship between landlords and tenants in certain urban centers.

The RCRRPL was enacted in various states, most notably in Lagos, and provides detailed
provisions on permissible rent increases, the recovery of possession of premises, and the
rights of both tenants and landlords. The key objectives of the RCRRPL are to:

1. Regulate rent increases: The law sets a maximum allowable rent increase based on the
location and type of property. This prevents landlords from imposing excessive rent hikes
that would disproportionately affect tenants, particularly low-income renters.

2. Ensure tenant protection: The law grants tenants certain protections, such as the right to
remain in a rented property unless there are justifiable grounds for eviction (e.g., non-
payment of rent, illegal use of the premises).

3. Provide a framework for dispute resolution: The RCRRPL also establishes processes for
resolving disputes between landlords and tenants, primarily through rent tribunals or

35
magistrate courts. These tribunals are empowered to hear cases related to rent increases,
eviction notices, and breaches of tenancy agreements.

One of the most notable provisions of the RCRRPL is that it requires rent increases to be
approved by a Rent Control Tribunal or court. This provision is meant to prevent arbitrary
rent hikes, ensuring that any increase is justifiable based on factors such as inflation or
improvements made to the property.

3.1.3 The Lagos State Tenancy Law, 2011

In 2011, Lagos State enacted the Lagos State Tenancy Law, which represents a significant
update to the legal framework governing landlord-tenant relationships. This law applies to all
residential and commercial properties in Lagos State, with some exceptions (such as
properties in high-income neighborhoods or properties leased by multinational
corporations). The Lagos State Tenancy Law includes several key provisions that reflect the
evolving housing challenges in the state:

- Rent Control Provisions: Similar to earlier laws, the Lagos State Tenancy Law sets guidelines
on rent increases and requires landlords to give tenants at least six months’ notice before
any rent hike. It also caps the amount of rent that can be demanded as advance payment,
limiting landlords to a maximum of one year’s rent in advance for new tenants and six
months’ rent for renewing tenants.

- Eviction Protections: The law introduces stronger eviction protections for tenants, requiring
landlords to follow due process before evicting tenants. Evictions can only occur after a court
order has been obtained, and tenants are given notice periods ranging from one week to six
months, depending on the circumstances.

- Dispute Resolution: The Lagos State Tenancy Law provides for the establishment of
Tenancy Tribunalsto adjudicate disputes between landlords and tenants. These tribunals are
meant to offer a faster, more accessible alternative to regular courts, which often face delays
and backlogs.

- Penalties for Violations: Landlords who violate the provisions of the Lagos State Tenancy
Law, such as by demanding more than the allowable rent advance or attempting to evict
tenants without a court order, face penalties, including fines and imprisonment.

This law has been seen as a progressive step toward addressing the housing affordability
crisis in Lagos, but its enforcement has been inconsistent, particularly in informal settlements
where much of the population resides.

3.1.4 The Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act (FCCPA), 2018

At the federal level, the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act (FCCPA), 2018
includes provisions relevant to rent control and tenant protections. The FCCPA aims to
promote fair competition and protect consumers from exploitative practices in various
sectors, including housing. Under this law, landlords are considered service providers, and
tenants are protected as consumers.

The FCCPA provides a general framework for addressing issues of unfair trade practices,
which could include exploitative rent increases or deceptive practices in rental agreements.
Tenants have the right to file complaints with the Federal Competition and Consumer
Protection Commission (FCCPC) if they believe their landlord has violated their rights. The

36
FCCPC is empowered to investigate such complaints and impose penalties on landlords found
guilty of misconduct.

While the FCCPA is not specifically designed for rent control, its broad consumer protection
mandate provides tenants with an additional avenue for seeking redress against unfair
practices. However, the applicability of this law to the housing sector is still evolving, and its
potential to address rent control issues remains underutilized.

3.1.5 THE LAGOS STATE RENT CONTROL AND RECOVERY

OF RESIDENTIAL PREMISES EDICT NO. 6, 1997

In 1996, the Lagos State government revisited the area of Rent Control in
the state through the enactment of the Rent Control (Tribunal) Edict No.
9. However, this edict was non-operational due to the absence of the
necessary machinery needed for its administration and enforcement. It
was subsequently repealed along with its predecessor by the Rent Control
and Recovery of Residential Premise Edict No. 6, 1997.

Hence, if the different Rent Control Legislations in the past did not
change the attitude of the landlords nor protect the tenants against the
alleged greed advance of the landlords, what exactly was the new edict
meant to achieve?

FEATURES OF EDICT NO. 6 OF 1997

This edict was promulgated during Colonel Mohammed Buba Marwa led
administration and it became enforced on the 21 st day of March 1997.
Although the edict is cited as “the Rent Control and Recovery of
Residential Premises Edict No. 6, 1997”, it only revealed its main
objective as an edict to control the rent of residential premises, also to
establish a rent tribunal and for other purposes connected therewith. This
objective falls short of the recovery of residential premises. This edict
thus, adopted in substance a long title which typical of Rent Control

37
Statutes. It also contains in addition to the provisions relating to Rent
Control, the procedure for the Recovery of Premises such as those
contained in the repealed Edict No. 9 of 1976 with its modifications.

The edict exhibits certain significant features with regard to Rent Control
Provisions and these are:

1. It established Rent Tribunals and defined their jurisdiction, power

and processing;

2. It prescribed in its schedule, Standard Rents in respect of the

different categories of residential accommodation available within
the different zones of the states as well as the mode of enforcement
of such standard rent; and

3. it contains other provisions meant as machinery that safeguards

toward the attainment of an effective Rent Control in Lagos State

APPLICATION OF THE EDICT

The edict applies generally to all leases and tenancies relating to

residential accommodation where the annual rental value is not more than
=N= 25,000. This can be deduced from the citation from the general
provisions of the edict and the regulations there-under. All other forms of
accommodation including commercial accommodation are obviously
excluded. The type of accommodation covered by this edict is defined by
section 36 (1) to include:

“....... residences so approved by the building approving

authorities designated by the state as residences regardless of
users, all buildings used as residences as from the commencement

38
 of this Edict and all other buildings whether or not approved by
the building approving authorities but used as residences.”

From the above provision, if an accommodation is designated as a

residential accommodation and the Edict applies under one of these three
situations namely:

1. Where the accommodation is approved by a building authority for

residential purposes irrespective of its users;

2. Whereas from the commencement of the Edict, a building is used

as residence; or

3. Where a building is used as residence with or without the approval

of the building approving authorities, although the Edict applies to
residential accommodation mainly, the Military Governor may by
order direct that its provision shall only apply to residential
accommodation which annual rental value as at 1996 was not more
than =N= 250,000 or exempt the application of the Edict to any
particular accommodation or area altogether.

The Edict appears to cover all district in Lagos State for which rent as
regulated by virtue of the Rent Control (standard rent) order made by the
Governor in pursuant of section 1 of the Edict. Whereby an error of
omission, a district is not listed, the zone in which the nearest district is
located will apply. Thus, until an order is expressly made by the Military
Governor specifically exempting the application of the Edict to any
particular accommodation or area, such exemption cannot be implied
from an omission to mention a district in the existing order made by the
Governor. The only limitation on the Edict’s application for now is where
the annual rental value of the residential accommodation as at 1996 was
more than =N= 250,000.

39
 THE ESTABLISHMENT AND THE COMPOSITION
OF THE RENT TRIBUNAL.

Section 6 of the Edict established a tribunal in each Local Government

Area, this tribunal consists a Chairman being a full time magistrate or a
part-time magistrate, with not less than five years post-call experience
appointed by the Military Administrator; while others are:
i. One Estate Surveyor and Valuer with not less than five years
post-qualification experience;
ii. Representative of the Landlords’ Association in the Local
Government Area; and
iii. A representative of the Tenants’ Association in the Local
Government Area.

The chairman and the Estate Surveyor and Valuer shall form a quorum. A
member shall hold office at the pleasure of the Military Administrator or
until resignation in writing, if the member is not employed in the public
service of the state. The Military Administrator may remove or appoint
any person as he may deem fit as chairman or member of the tribunal.
While the inclusion of representatives of each Landlords’ and Tenants’
associations in the composition of the tribunal may appear to be a
democratization process of attaining justice in matters relating to fixing of
standard rent acceptable to the two major interest concerned, namely:
a. Landlord and Tenant.
b. The prudence of retaining the provisions under the new
dispensation is open to question.

40
Apart from not stating any credential qualifying such representatives at
least, as fit and proper persons to serve as members of the tribunal, their
role under the new edict, where standard rents have been predetermined
and fixed is at best political, and at most, negative in practical terms.
Ascertaining, fixing and enforcing of standard rents by the tribunal
should normally entail a sound legal mind to interpret the law of the edict
and the assistance of an Estate Surveyor and Valuer as an assessor in
evaluating factors such as the nature of tenement, the nature and value of
infrastructure and other facilities.

The economic value and/or implications of improvements or repairs made

by the landlord or tenant on the tenanted apartment or remises – all of
which may influence the standard rent applicable now or in future. The
role of representatives of the Landlords’ and Tenants’ Associations, in the
determination of standard rent, remains conjectural from the four walls of
the edict.

This is not to say however, that such representatives do not have a role to
play in rent control since they represent the interest of the society the law
is meant to govern; but that is at the stage of law making. For example,
their input and involvement in debates at the formative stage of
legislation may go a long way in assisting the state in formulating
effective policy on rent control and consequently, a general acceptable
and workable system through legislation, such socio-political role
becomes irrelevant at the level of interpretation and enforcement of the
law and may be-cloud objectivity and hamper effective running of one
judicial machinery in practice.

41
The reasonability of such inclusion is further put into question when it is
realized that members shall be remunerated from the state coffers. With
the existence of about 20 (twenty) Local Government Areas in Lagos
State, the running expenses of the rent tribunal will be enormous and far
from being cost effective. Except the edict assign a functional role to such
representatives, which will justify the enormous expenditure of the state
on their remunerations and allowances, it is of my opinion, that the tax
payers’ money be saved from such an unjustifiable expenditure.

THE STANDARD RENT.

Fixing of standard rent for residential accommodation is not a new

phenomenon. The repealed Rent Control and Recovery of Residential
Premises Edict No. 9, 1976 made provision for same and further
proscribe the limit of rent in the schedule to the order under the law. But
the argument against the law had always been its static nature despite the
high inflationary trend and step decline in the value of our Naira over the
years. The repealed Rent Control (Tribunal) Edict No.6 of 1996 sought to
remedy this anomaly by vesting on the rent tribunal the exclusive
jurisdiction to fix standard rent in respect of residential accommodation
upon application by the landlord, the tenant or any other interested
persons while jettisoning the provision of the earlier law, which
empowered the tribunal to fix standard rent by order made under it.
However, Edict No. 6 of 1997 closes the 1976 model with modifications.
Section 2 (1) of the 1997 Edict makes the standard rent prescribed by the
military Administrator payable in respect of the type of category of
accommodation to which it applies.

42
Such standard rent may be reviewed upwards, say every three years or by
such other periods the Military administrator may prescribe and with a
margin not more than 20%. {See sections 2 (2) and (3) of the Edict}. For
purposes of ascertaining and fixing standard rents, the tribunal is vested
with the jurisdiction on application to it by the landlord or tenant or any
other interested persons, to determine standard rent payable in respect of
any residential accommodation let before or after the commencement of
the edict, (see section 7 (1) of the Edict) within the limit of the rent
prescribed in the schedule to the order made by the Military
Administrator in pursuant of the edict.

While the provision on rent review in the new edict may appear to be an
improvement on the law No. 9 of 1976 now repealed, it does not reflect
the economic realities of Nigeria. Rent must not merely be aimed at the
prevailing social circumstances but must essentially be aligned with
economic realities to be meaniful.

Taking a closer look at the edict and the order made there-under with
regards to standard rent would reveal the sole determination of
government to improve the social conditions of the poor masses by
ensuring affordable accommodation under the hopeless economic
situation over which the state has no control. The irony of the situation is
that while government is pegging rent review at 20% every three years,
there is no corresponding data to show the same or an almost equal level
of inflation.

The rate of inflation over the last one decade has been put at over 300%
(SOURCE: G. ONASODE: Economic Development in the past one
decade: Problems and Prospects.” U.K.); which is a far cry from

43
Government’s presumption on the measure of rent review every three
years.

It is also doubtful whether government can legislate effectively on private

accommodation when prices of other variables like land are left to drift
with the geometrical progression of inflationary trend. Private
accommodation cannot be the subject matter of government social
security, but like any commodity in the market, it is susceptible to the
driving force of inflation. That the standard rent may be unreliable after
all is supported by the provision to section 3 (1) of the Edict, which
enables the landlord to apply to the tribunal to vary the standard rent.

Any rent prescribed as standard rent under the edict shall supercede any
rent between the landlord and the tenant and any order made in respect of
such standard rent by the tribunal, shall bind all persons including the
landlord, tenant or mortgagee of such premises.

AGREEMENTS ON RENT
The edict made it unlawful for a landlord to accept rent on residential
accommodation in excess of the standard rent prescribed. {See section 3
(1)}. Although the edict enables the landlord to apply to the tribunal to
vary the standard rent, the ground for such application was not made
known.

The nearest provision on the subject appears to be section 34 of edict

which empowers the Military Administrator to make regulations inter-
alia prescribing the type and nature of repairs or fixtures in the premises
concerned to be taken cognizance of in computing a standard rent (See

44
Section 34 paragraph (e) of the edict). Pending a laid down criterion in
any such regulation, the criteria to be applied by the tribunal where there
is any application to vary remain a mute point.

Existing agreements on rent shall be construed in the light of the edict.

Where the rent agreed upon before the edict is higher than the standard
rent {Section 3 (2)}.
The tenant under an agreement for a rent less than the standard rent shall
continue to pay as from the commencement of the edict the same rent
until the tribunal makes an order varying the rent {Section 3(3)}.

Where a landlord accepted any rent in excess of the standard rent, he

contravened the edict through without penal consequences. In KIRIKIRI
COTTON LIMITED vs. DEWANI, the court in interpreting a similar
provision of the Ugandan Rent Restriction Ordinance of 1949, which also
contained no provision for recovery of such premium, held that the tenant
could recover excess rent paid. The court reasoned that the penalty for
breach of the provision was in the landlord who received the excess rent.
Per Lord Denning, also in FEYISITAN vs. WILLIAMS (1962) LLR
P. 122, an application to recover the excess rent could be brought by the
tenant even after the determination of tenancy.

VALIDITY OF LEASE TENANCY AGREEMENT UNDER

WHICH PROVISIONS OF EDICT CONTRAVENED
The question which appears to flow from the statutory prohibitions is that
of the validity of a lease or tenancy agreement under the parties who paid
or received rent in excess of the period prescribed by the statute.

45
In addition to the penalty imposed by the statute, can it be said that the
whole agreement itself is void? The position of the law as laid down by
the court of Appeal in FIRST BANK of NIGERIA LTD vs. PAN
BISBILDER NIGERIA LTD (1990) 2 NWLR (pt 1134) P. 647,
dealing with the same situation is that where a statute merely prohibits
certain class of contract and stipulates a penalty for the prohibition
without expressly providing whether or not the contract is void, it does
not follow if the contract is valid. Either of the parties to the contract can
rely on it in making a claim or enforcing a right there-under.

Also, a receipt of excess rent or illegal loan or premium under the edict
will not make the whole agreement illegal and the tribunal may apply the
Blue Pencil Rule to sewer the illegal aspect and enforce the contract. That
principle of law was formulated by the English court in a similar situation
in ALLION vs. SPICKERMANN (1976) C. H. pg. 58.

In that case, an assignee of a lease was made to pay premium by the

assignor who received same in contravention of the English Rent Acts
which rendered illegal all agreements to pay a premium in such
circumstances. When the assignor refuse to perform his part of the
bargain and the assignee brought an action for an order of specific
performance, the assignor resisted the claim on the ground that the
assignee’s claim was unenforceable as it arose from an illegal contract.
The court, applying the Blue Pencil Rule, serves the illegal aspect and
ordered specific performance of the contract. Thus, neither of the parties
can be precluded from enforcing his claim under the contract on the
ground that he was party to illegality.

46
2.5 IMPACT OF LAND USE ACT 1978 ON THE
RELATIONSHIP OF LANDLORD AND TENANT

Before the Land Use Act, 1978, which came into force on 29 th March
1978, landowners in Nigeria enjoyed absolute title of the fee simple
estate. However, since the promulgation of the Land Use Act, all land
comprised in the territory of each state in the federation became vested in
the Governor of that state and such land is to be held in trust and
administered for the use and common benefit of all Nigerians.

Accordingly, former landowners have no more absolute title of fee simple

estate in the original sense. His holding will be for an indefinite period
unless and until a grant for a definite term is made to him. If a definite
term is granted to him, the term is referred to as a Right of Occupancy,
which can only be alienated with the consent of the Governor of the state
or the local authority depending on whether it is a statutory Right of
Occupancy. A statutory Right of Occupancy is granted or demand or
deemed to have been granted by the state Governor in respect of lands in
urban areas where as a customary right of occupancy is grated or deemed
to be granted by the local authority.

Deemed granted refer to developed land (see 2 91), 5 and 34 of the Land
Use Act 1978, also OGUNLEYE vs. ONI (1990) 5 N.W.L.R part 152
page 745). And land can be developed not withstanding that it has no
roads, building and other features set out in section 50 (1) of the land use
Act, 1978. The question whether a land is developed depends in the fact
and surrounding circumstances of each case in OBIKOYA & SONS
LTD vs. GOVERNOR OF LAGOS STATE, where the economic use

47
and utilities placed on the land influence the court to decide that the land
in issue as developed.
Within our given context, the landlord would qualify as the holder of the
Right of Occupancy, either statutory or customary. It now seems that the
issuance of a certificate of occupancy to a landlord as evidenced of a
grant were a piece of land where a building is executed would operate as
a head and the landlord as the head lessor may grant a private lease to the
tenant. This was what happened in the case of AGUDA SAWA vs.
MOHAMMED (1974) N. R. W. L. R at 159 where the holder of a right
of occupancy allocated and building both houses erected there to operator
on payment of rent, and the court held that the grant created a lease and
therefore a relationship of landlord and tenant. A customary right of
occupancy takes priority over a statutory right of occupancy unless it was
previously revoked.

MERIT AND DEMERITS OF THE EDICT

MERITS:
(1) Cheap Housing: In terms of cheap housing, Rent Control Edict
assist the tenants to any less for what he uses, the maximum rent
which is ceiling rent is normally less than full market value.
This makes it possible for tenants to enjoy a subsidized rent for
below the capital or market rental value.

(2) With the edict pegging the rate increases at 20% over a period
of three (3) years, there is likelihood of stability in rent
beginning with the sitting tenants.

48
 (3) It helps the tenants to perform their obligation under the lease
agreement by carrying out repairs without wasting much time.

(4) People are able to build their own houses because of unforeseen
future

(5) The law protects the tenants more than the landlord though the
landlord’s title is left intact

DEMERITS
(1) The edict discourages investors from investing in residential
property in that the incentive of the developer would be killed,
whereas demand for residential accommodation continues to
rise i.e. the ability and incentive to develop is reduced and the
investors fail to maintain and put their property in good and
tenantable condition.

(2) Landlords are not ready to lease their vacant house as

residential property anymore due to the long time litigation
takes.

(3) The edict discourages maintenance in building, because the

owner of different residential properties will no longer carry out
maintenance at regular intervals on their property which leads to
total obsolete and increase in the price of outgoings.

(4) Black market is created in that tenants will not bother

themselves about the edict when they desperately seek for
residential accommodation because of high demand for

49
 residential accommodation. More so, it constitutes effective
demand of houses for sale thereby artificially raising the sale
price.

(5) There will be problem of obsolescence in that owners of

residential accommodation will no longer maintain their
property with the meager rent they now collect due to the edict,
and the maintenance culture will fall drastically.

(6) It discourages new letting and so worsen the position of

potential tenant who may be willing to pay their rent that may
be obtained in the open market.

(7) The edict reduces the supply of rented houses promptly by

retarding new construction of house to let. It discourages
conversion and sub-letting, also the artificial incentives of given
into sell vacant houses of owner occupation. The edict
discourages conversion of houses because of the owner –
occupier.

(8) The edict leads people to circumvent the law in that most
people especially the potential tenant will be willing to pay
more to obtain an accommodation.

(9) The edict makes estate agency to be at its lowest ebb.

(10) The edict has not taken into consideration the economic
situation of the country. This makes the carrying out of repairs

50
 difficult because the price of building materials has not been
taken into consideration i.e. management.

(11) It discourages the movement of labour from one locality to

another. Tenants take advantage from its protection and refuse
to move from where they have established rights.

(12) It exempted some specific areas or locality from the edict; this
makes the landlords in such areas or localities to fix any
arbitrary rents i.e. giving preferential treatment to some people.

(13) The edict inflates the demand of residential properties. It also

leads to increase in demand and congested accommodation
through conversion of kitchen and garages into rooms. This is
due to the fact that there is no new development of residential
properties thereby supply for accommodation will be reduced.

EFFECT OF THE RENT CONTROL AND RECOVERY

OF RESIDENTIAL PREMISES EDICT ON LANDLORD
TENANT RELATIONSHIP
The Lagos State Rent Control Recovery of Residential Premises Edict
No. 6 of 1997 was enacted due to the great need to control and
regulate prohibitive rent that characterised the residential property
market.

In a relationship where the landlord and tenant agree to share the

responsibilities of estate management to their mutual advantage, the
usefulness of the arrangement is largely confirmed by its long history

51
and continued economic effectiveness but inevitably there are
weaknesses.

Changes in economic conditions can leave rents abnormally high or

low and constant problems must be faced where the return yielded by
a property is so low that it satisfies neither the landlord nor the tenant.
It is prominent that is very common in many landlord and tenants
relationships. Even many believe that the rents are increased
arbitrarily by the landlords without due consideration to the interest of
the tenants.

Due to the belief and some others, members of tenants have resorted
(apart from recourse to the law courts and lawyers for assistance) to
other ways of checking the excesses of the landlords. One of such way
is holding the landlord to ransom by refusing to pay rent. This action
may tie down the expected return on the property, which may go for
other areas of investment.

It is very unlawful for a landlord to forcibly eject tenant upon his

refusal to pay rent, the landlord has to go through the due process of
the law. The action of the tenants contradicts the agreement made with
the landlord at the beginning of the lease that he shall pay rent as at
when due.

As in section 13 which says “when and as soon as the term or interest

of the tenant of any premises determines or has been duly determined
by a written notice to quit in forms B, C or D, in schedule 1 of this
edict, such tenant or if such tenant does not actually occupy the
premises or only occupies a part thereof is actually occupies, neglects

52
or refuses to quit and deliver up possession of the premises or any part
thereof, the landlord of the said premises or his agent may cause the
person so neglecting or refusing to quit and deliver up possession to
be served with a written notice as inform signed by the landlord or his
agent, of the landlord’s intention to proceed to recover possession or a
date not less than seven days from the date of service.”

The rent control Edict led to the emergence of a black market because
the landlord no longer exposes their properties to the open market for
fear of being prosecuted.
This means there is continuous reduction in the number of dwelling
for letting as a result of the Edict.

Rent standardisation by reducing landlord’s return from their

investment, depletes the proportion of rents reserveable for
maintenance purposes. In fact, it could lead to total negligence of the
dwellings as landlords are unable to pay property professionals to look
after their investment and may even cease to carry out maintenance
work altogether. This is because landlords will try to maintain their
real income level by withdrawing from repairs and maintenance.

The result is a reduction of the quality of the existing stock of

dwellings especially in extreme cases and in old dwellings where
routine maintenance costs may even exceed the level of the controlled
rent received. A survey carried out in India showed that landlords
failed to perform maintenance forcing tenants to choose between
paying for repairs themselves and living in substandard conditions
(World Bank Report)

53
The rent control edict has created a distribution on the property market
which led to under-valuation for official purpose, this reduce the
revenue to government from tenement rates, withholding taxes,
consent fee and either taxes on properties.

Legislation on rent control usually includes provision for security of

tenure and the aim is to protect primarily, the interest of the tenant and
secondarily those of the landlord. Usually, the relationship between a
landlord and the tenant is regulated by a lease agreement. A lease
agreement is mutually entered into by both parties to guide the
conduct of the lease.

Rent control usually has the power to undermine the terms of the lease
agreement especially in favour of the tenant and this usually causes
friction between the landlords and their tenants. This is the why there
are endless litigations of aggrieved tenants or landlords taking the
other party to the tribunal.
The implication of this is that controls do not provide a conducive
environment under which the terms of the lease agreement can be
executed.

Rent controls by setting up rent tribunals seem to transfer some of the

duties of the property manager to the rent tribunals. The provision of
the edict can also make it difficult for management objectives to be
achieved. The vesting of power to determine rents passing on
properties, for example, would mean that the property manager cannot
determine value based on the present condition and motives of the
owner and according to features of the property.

54
 In the same view, the tribunals (especially the 1997 Edict) are given
the right to collect rents and confiscate rents on the landlord’s refusal
to collect them. They are also supposed to settle disputes between
landlords and tenants. All this appear to compete with the property
manager’s scope as some of his major functions are being performed
by the tribunals.

3.2 Institutional Framework

The institutional framework governing rent control in Nigeria is composed of various

governmental bodies, agencies, and tribunals responsible for implementing, enforcing, and
adjudicating rent control laws. These institutions function at both the federal and state
levels, and they play a vital role in ensuring that tenants and landlords operate within the
bounds of the law.

Despite the presence of these institutions, rent control in Nigeria faces significant challenges
related to inefficiency, inadequate funding, and corruption. This section explores the key
institutions involved in rent control, their roles, and the challenges they face in fulfilling their
mandates.

3.2.1 Rent Tribunals

Rent tribunals are quasi-judicial bodies that play a central role in the adjudication of disputes
between landlords and tenants. They are typically established by state governments under
specific rent control laws, such as the Rent Control and Recovery of Residential Premises Law
(RCRRPL)**, which exists in various states.

Role of Rent Tribunals

The primary role of rent tribunals is to provide a specialized forum for the resolution of
disputes related to rent control. Their functions include:

1. Adjudicating Disputes: Rent tribunals are tasked with resolving disputes between landlords
and tenants, such as disagreements over rent increases, eviction notices, security deposits,
and the terms of tenancy agreements. These tribunals are designed to offer a quicker and
more accessible alternative to regular courts, which are often burdened by long delays.

2. Approving Rent Increases: One of the most important functions of rent tribunals is to
review and approve applications for rent increases submitted by landlords. According to
various state laws, landlords are required to seek approval from the tribunal before
increasing the rent beyond a certain threshold. The tribunal assesses factors such as

55
inflation, improvements made to the property, and local market conditions before
determining whether the rent increase is justified.

3. Enforcing Eviction Protections: Rent tribunals are also responsible for ensuring that
eviction protections under rent control laws are enforced. Landlords cannot evict tenants
without following due process, which typically requires obtaining an eviction order from a
tribunal or court. The tribunal examines whether the grounds for eviction are valid, such as
non-payment of rent or illegal use of the property.

Challenges Faced by Rent Tribunals

While rent tribunals are a critical part of the institutional framework, they face several
challenges that limit their effectiveness:

Underfunding: Many rent tribunals in Nigeria operate with insufficient financial resources.
This affects their ability to process cases efficiently, leading to delays in the adjudication of
disputes. Without adequate funding, tribunals struggle to retain qualified personnel,
maintain facilities, and provide the necessary infrastructure for efficient operations.

Backlog of Cases: Rent tribunals, especially in states with high population densities such as
Lagos, face a significant backlog of cases. This backlog is compounded by the fact that
tenants and landlords often prefer to resolve disputes informally or outside the legal system
due to the perceived inefficiencies of the tribunal system. As a result, those who do use the
tribunals often face long waits before their cases are heard.

Limited Jurisdiction: Rent tribunals are typically limited in their jurisdiction to specific urban
areas where rent control laws are applicable. This leaves vast informal housing settlements
outside the reach of rent tribunals. In these areas, disputes are often settled through
informal community mechanisms, and tenants have little legal recourse in the event of
exploitation by landlords.

Corruption: Corruption within the rent tribunal system is another significant challenge.
Landlords, particularly those with considerable financial resources, may bribe tribunal
officials or exert influence to obtain favorable rulings. This undermines the credibility of the
tribunal system and perpetuates a cycle of injustice for tenants.

3.2.2 State Housing and Property Development Authorities

Each state in Nigeria has a State Housing Authority or a State Property Development
Authority**, which is responsible for regulating housing policies, including the development
and enforcement of rent control laws. These agencies often work in conjunction with the
ministries of housing and urban development to promote affordable housing and implement
rent control policies.

Roles of State Housing and Property Development Authorities

These authorities have multiple roles related to rent control:

1. Policy Formulation: State Housing Authorities are involved in the formulation of policies
aimed at addressing housing shortages and ensuring that rental markets remain affordable.
This includes designing and implementing rent control laws, developing public housing
projects, and encouraging private sector participation in affordable housing.

56
2. Monitoring and Enforcement: These authorities are tasked with monitoring compliance
with rent control laws by landlords. They ensure that rent increases are within the legally
permissible limits, that tenants are not evicted unlawfully, and that landlords adhere to the
terms of tenancy agreements. In practice, however, enforcement often falls short due to
limited institutional capacity.

3. Public Housing Development: Some State Housing Authorities are directly involved in the
development of public housing projects aimed at providing affordable rental units for low-
income residents. These projects help alleviate some of the pressures on the private rental
market, though the scale of public housing development remains insufficient to meet
demand.

Challenges Facing State Housing Authorities

Despite their important roles, State Housing Authorities face several challenges:

- Funding Constraints: Similar to rent tribunals, State Housing Authorities are often
underfunded, limiting their capacity to effectively monitor and enforce rent control laws.
Without adequate resources, these agencies struggle to conduct regular inspections, process
tenant complaints, and implement public housing projects.

- Limited Geographic Reach: In many cases, State Housing Authorities focus primarily on
urban centers, where formal housing markets are more prominent. This leaves informal
settlements, which house a large proportion of urban residents, outside the reach of these
authorities. Consequently, rent control laws are rarely enforced in these areas, leaving
tenants vulnerable to exploitation.

- Coordination with Federal Authorities: Housing policy in Nigeria is characterized by a lack

of coordination between federal and state authorities. While state governments are
responsible for implementing rent control laws, federal housing agencies such as the Federal
Mortgage Bank of Nigeria (FMBN) and the Federal Housing Authority (FHA) also play a role in
housing finance and policy. The absence of a cohesive national housing policy often leads to
duplication of efforts and fragmented enforcement.

3.2.3 The Judiciary

The Nigerian judiciary plays an integral role in the institutional framework for rent control by
interpreting and enforcing rent control laws. While rent tribunals are designed to handle
minor disputes, more complex cases involving rent control, tenancy agreements, and
property rights are brought before regular courts, including magistrate courts, high courts,
and the Court of Appeal.

Role of the Judiciary

The judiciary performs the following key functions:

1. Interpreting Rent Control Laws: Nigerian courts are responsible for interpreting the
provisions of rent control laws and determining their applicability in specific cases. Judges
review legislative intent, statutory language, and legal precedents to make rulings that clarify
the rights and obligations of landlords and tenants.

2. Adjudicating Complex Disputes: The judiciary handles complex disputes that go beyond
the jurisdiction of rent tribunals, including cases involving property rights, the
constitutionality of rent control laws, and conflicts between state and federal laws. For

57
example, high courts and appellate courts may be asked to rule on whether a specific rent
increase violates a tenant’s constitutional right to affordable housing.

3. Enforcing Court Orders: Courts play a crucial role in enforcing orders related to rent
control, such as eviction orders and rulings on rent increases. Once a court issues a
judgment, it is the responsibility of the landlord and tenant to comply with the ruling. In
cases where parties refuse to comply, the court may take further action, such as issuing
contempt orders or mandating enforcement through law enforcement agencies.

Challenges Facing the Judiciary

The judiciary faces several systemic challenges in enforcing rent control laws:

- Backlog of Cases: Nigerian courts, particularly at the lower levels, suffer from a significant
backlog of cases. This creates delays in the resolution of rent-related disputes, which can
have severe consequences for tenants facing eviction or landlords seeking rent arrears. The
slow pace of the judicial process undermines the effectiveness of rent control laws and
contributes to informal settlements of disputes.

- Limited Access to Justice: For many tenants, particularly those in informal housing
settlements, accessing the formal judicial system is costly and time-consuming. The lack of
affordable legal representation and the complexity of the legal process deter tenants from
seeking justice through the courts. In the absence of accessible legal mechanisms, many
disputes are resolved informally or remain unaddressed.

3.2.4 Federal and State Ministries of Housing

At both the federal and state levels, the **Ministry of Housing** plays a vital role in shaping
housing policy, including rent control regulations. The Ministry of Housing is responsible for
developing national and state-level strategies to address housing shortages, regulate rental
markets, and promote affordable housing initiatives.

Roles of the Ministry of Housing

The Ministry of Housing has several key responsibilities:

1. Policy Development and Oversight: The Ministry is responsible for formulating housing
policies, including rent control legislation, that reflect the housing needs of the population. It
coordinates with state governments, housing authorities, and other relevant agencies to
ensure that housing policies are effectively implemented and enforced.

2. Public Housing Programs: The Ministry oversees public housing programs aimed at
providing affordable rental units to low- and middle-income families. By increasing the
supply of affordable housing, the Ministry helps to ease pressure on the private rental
market and reduce the need for stringent rent control measures.

3. Regulatory Oversight: The Ministry monitors compliance with national housing policies,
including rent control laws, and works to ensure that rental markets operate fairly and
transparently. This involves overseeing the activities of state housing authorities and
ensuring that landlords and tenants adhere to the legal framework governing

3.2.5Local Government Authorities (LGAs)

Local Government Authorities (LGAs) play a smaller but still significant role in the
institutional framework for rent control, particularly in urban areas. They are responsible for

58
the day-to-day administration of housing policies and, in some cases, assist in enforcing rent
control laws within their jurisdictions.

Roles of Local Government Authorities

The functions of LGAs in the context of rent control include:

1. Issuing Tenancy Certificates: In some states, LGAs are responsible for issuing certificates of
tenancy, which formalize rental agreements between landlords and tenants. These
certificates provide legal recognition of tenancy agreements and ensure that tenants’ rights
are protected under the rent control laws.

2. Handling Tenant Complaints: LGAs may serve as a first point of contact for tenants who
experience issues with landlords. Complaints about rent increases, eviction notices, or
maintenance issues are often reported to LGAs, which then liaise with state housing
authorities or rent tribunals to resolve the disputes.

3. Enforcing Property Regulations: In addition to rent control, LGAs enforce property and
building regulations within their jurisdictions. This includes ensuring that rental properties
meet safety and health standards and that landlords comply with housing codes. When
properties are found to be substandard, LGAs have the authority to mandate repairs or even
declare properties uninhabitable.

Challenges Faced by LGAs

While LGAs are important in the rent control framework, they face numerous challenges:

Lack of Resources: Many LGAs lack the financial and human resources necessary to
effectively monitor and enforce rent control regulations. Without adequate staffing or
funding, they struggle to respond to tenant complaints or conduct inspections of rental
properties.

- Limited Authority: In many cases, LGAs have limited authority over rental agreements and
disputes. While they can issue certificates of tenancy and enforce local property regulations,
they often lack the legal power to resolve complex rent control disputes, which must be
referred to state-level agencies or rent tribunals.

- *mCorruption: As with other institutions in the rent control framework, corruption is a

challenge within LGAs. Some officials may be susceptible to bribery, allowing landlords to
bypass rent control regulations or avoid penalties for substandard housing conditions. This
diminishes the credibility of the rent control system and leaves tenants vulnerable to
exploitation.

3.2.6 Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) and Tenant Advocacy Groups

Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) and tenant advocacy groups play a crucial role in Nigeria’s
rent control institutional framework by representing the interests of tenants and working to
ensure that rent control laws are enforced equitably.

Roles of CSOs and Tenant Advocacy Groups

CSOs and advocacy groups are involved in the following activities:

1. Legal Assistance: Many CSOs provide legal assistance to low-income tenants who are
unable to afford private legal representation. This includes offering advice on tenants’ rights

59
under rent control laws, representing tenants in rent tribunals or courts, and advocating for
reforms to improve tenant protections.

2. Public Awareness Campaigns: CSOs are active in educating tenants about their rights
under rent control laws. Through public awareness campaigns, they inform tenants of the
legal limits on rent increases, eviction protections, and how to seek redress through the
courts or rent tribunals. These efforts are especially important in informal settlements,
where tenants are often unaware of their rights.

3. Policy Advocacy: Tenant advocacy groups often engage in policy advocacy to push for
stronger tenant protections and the improvement of rent control laws. This includes lobbying
state governments to implement more effective enforcement mechanisms, calling for
increased funding for rent tribunals, and promoting the development of affordable housing.

Challenges Facing CSOs and Tenant Advocacy Groups

Despite their critical role, CSOs and tenant advocacy groups face several challenges:

- Limited Funding: Many CSOs operate on limited budgets, which restricts the scope of their
activities. Without sufficient funding, they are unable to provide legal assistance to all
tenants in need or conduct extensive public awareness campaigns.

- Hostile Political Environment: In some cases, tenant advocacy groups face resistance from
landlords, property developers, and even government officials who view their activities as
disruptive. This can lead to intimidation, harassment, or even legal action against these
groups, making it difficult for them to carry out their work effectively.

3.2.7 Private Sector Involvement

While rent control is primarily enforced through government institutions, the private sector,
particularly landlords and real estate developers, also plays a key role in the housing market
and in shaping the implementation of rent control policies.

Role of the Private Sector

Private sector stakeholders, especially landlords and property developers, are directly
affected by rent control laws and are therefore important actors in the institutional
framework. Their roles include:

1. Compliance with Rent Control Laws: Landlords are required to comply with rent control
regulations, including limits on rent increases, eviction procedures, and the maintenance of
rental properties. Compliance is often monitored by state housing authorities or LGAs, but in
practice, many landlords circumvent these laws due to weak enforcement.

2. Influencing Policy: Real estate developers and landlord associations often engage in policy
discussions with government officials regarding rent control laws. In some cases, they lobby
for more relaxed regulations or for the abolition of rent control altogether, arguing that it
discourages investment in the rental housing market.

3. Provision of Affordable Housing: In some states, the private sector is encouraged to

participate in the development of affordable housing through public-private partnerships.
This can help alleviate pressure on the rental market and reduce the need for stringent rent
control measures.

Challenges with Private Sector Involvement

60
The involvement of the private sector in rent control is often contentious, with several
challenges:

- Resistance to Regulation: Many landlords resist rent control laws, viewing them as overly
restrictive and harmful to their financial interests. This resistance can take the form of non-
compliance, legal challenges, or lobbying efforts to weaken or repeal rent control measures.

- Exploitation of Tenants: In areas where rent control enforcement is weak, some landlords
take advantage of tenants by imposing illegal rent increases, demanding excessive security
deposits, or evicting tenants without following due process. This is particularly common in
informal housing markets, where tenants have little legal protection.

3.2.8 Federal Mortgage Bank of Nigeria (FMBN)

The Federal Mortgage Bank of Nigeria (FMBN) is another important institution in Nigeria’s
housing sector. While the FMBN’s primary mandate is to provide mortgage financing for
homebuyers, its activities have a direct impact on the rental housing market and rent control
policies.

Role of the FMBN

The FMBN’s roles in the context of rent control include:

1. Providing Affordable Housing Finance: By offering mortgage financing to individuals and

developers, the FMBN helps to increase the supply of housing, which can indirectly alleviate
pressure on the rental market. As more people are able to purchase homes, demand for
rental properties may decrease, making rent control less necessary.

2. Supporting Public-Private Partnerships: The FMBN facilitates public-private partnerships

that aim to increase the supply of affordable housing. These partnerships can help create
rental properties that are subject to rent control regulations, ensuring that low- and middle-
income families have access to affordable housing options.

Challenges Facing the FMBN

The FMBN, like other institutions in Nigeria’s housing sector, faces significant challenges:

- Limited Reach: The FMBN’s activities are primarily focused on providing mortgage finance
to middle- and upper-income earners. As a result, its impact on the affordable rental housing
market is limited, and rent control laws remain necessary to protect lower-income tenants.

- Funding and Bureaucratic Challenges: The FMBN often faces delays in processing mortgage
applications and disbursing funds, which limits its ability to support the rapid development
of affordable housing. Without streamlined processes and increased funding, the FMBN’s
contribution to alleviating Nigeria’s housing crisis remains constrained.

Conclusion

The institutional framework for rent control in Nigeria is multifaceted, involving multiple
governmental bodies, tribunals, and private sector actors. Each of these institutions plays a
role in regulating the rental housing market, ensuring compliance with rent control laws, and
providing redress for tenants and landlords.

61
However, significant challenges remain. Many of these institutions, particularly rent tribunals
and state housing authorities, are underfunded and understaffed, leading to inefficiencies in
the enforcement of rent control laws. Corruption, limited jurisdiction, and the prevalence of
informal housing markets further complicate the implementation of rent control policies.

For rent control to be more effective, the institutional framework must be strengthened
through better funding, improved coordination between federal and state authorities, and
greater public awareness of tenants’ rights. In addition, reforms are needed to address the
exploitation of tenants in informal housing markets, where rent control laws are often not
enforced.

By addressing these challenges and strengthening the institutional framework, Nigeria can
better protect tenants, stabilize rental prices, and promote fair and affordable housing for all.

CHAPTER 4

IMPLICATIONS AND CHALLENGES OF RENT CONTROL IN NIGERIA

This chapter explores the broader implications of rent control in Nigeria, followed by a
detailed discussion of the challenges that hinder the effective implementation of rent control
laws. The objective is to provide a balanced view of how rent control impacts tenants,
landlords, and the overall housing market, as well as the barriers to achieving its intended
outcomes.

4.1 Implications of Rent Control in Nigeria

Rent control laws, when effectively implemented, aim to protect tenants from unjustifiable
rent increases, ensure housing affordability, and foster a stable rental market. However,
these laws can have varied economic and social implications for both tenants and landlords,
as well as the broader housing market.

- Tenant Protection and Housing Affordability: One of the primary objectives of rent control
is to ensure that tenants, particularly low- and middle-income households, are not priced out
of urban areas. Rent control can make housing more affordable by limiting the frequency and
magnitude of rent increases, thus providing tenants with stability and protection against
arbitrary rent hikes.

- Reduced Displacement: By curbing rapid rent increases, rent control reduces the likelihood
of tenant displacement. This is especially significant in urban centers like Lagos and Abuja,
where rapid urbanization and demand for housing have driven up rental prices, often forcing
lower-income residents to move to peripheral areas with fewer opportunities and services.

62
- Effect on Landlords' Profits: On the other hand, rent control can reduce landlords' ability to
increase rent in line with inflation or property maintenance costs. Some landlords may feel
discouraged from investing in property improvements, fearing that they won’t be able to
recover their costs due to legal rent caps. This may lead to a gradual decline in the quality of
rental housing, particularly in cases where landlords cannot afford necessary repairs or
renovations.

- Impact on Investment in the Rental Market: A significant implication of rent control is its
potential to deter investment in the rental housing market. Investors may be reluctant to
build or expand rental properties if they perceive that rent control laws will limit their ability
to generate profits. This could further exacerbate the housing supply shortage in Nigeria's
urban centers.

- Encouragement of Informal Arrangements: Rent control laws may lead to unintended

consequences, such as informal or under-the-table agreements between landlords and
tenants. Landlords may seek to bypass legal restrictions by demanding upfront payments
(e.g., two to three years of rent in advance) or by entering into agreements that are not
officially documented. These informal practices undermine the intent of rent control and
often place tenants at greater risk.

- Black Market for Rentals: In some cases, stringent rent control policies can lead to the
creation of a "black market" for rental units, where landlords covertly charge higher rents
than what is legally allowed. This further erodes the effectiveness of rent control and may
lead to unfair exploitation of tenants.

- Market Distortion: Rent control can distort the rental market by creating a mismatch
between demand and supply. When rent prices are artificially suppressed, demand for rental
units may increase, but the supply of available rental housing may not keep pace, leading to
scarcity. This can result in long waiting lists for controlled rental units, while those without
access to these units may have to resort to less regulated (and often more expensive)
housing options.

In summary, the implications of rent control in Nigeria are complex and multifaceted,
affecting tenants' rights, landlords' profitability, and the overall housing market. While the
intent is to safeguard tenants and ensure affordability, there are unintended consequences
that could hinder its long-term effectiveness.

4.2 Challenges to Rent Control in Nigeria

Despite its potential benefits, rent control in Nigeria faces numerous challenges that limit its
effectiveness. These challenges span legal, institutional, economic, and social dimensions.

4.2.1 Weak Legal Framework and Inconsistent Enforcement

One of the primary challenges to rent control in Nigeria is the weakness of the legal
framework governing the rental housing market. While several states have enacted rent
control laws, these regulations vary significantly from state to state, leading to a lack of
consistency in how rent control is applied.

63
- Inadequate Legislation: Some states have rent control laws that are either outdated or
poorly drafted, with loopholes that landlords can exploit to circumvent rent regulations. The
legal provisions often fail to specify clear mechanisms for monitoring compliance or for
setting enforceable limits on rent increases.
- Inconsistent Application: Even in states with more robust rent control laws, enforcement
remains a significant issue. The lack of uniformity in rent control laws across Nigeria has
created a patchwork of regulations, where tenants in some regions are more protected than
others. This inconsistency undermines the broader objectives of rent control.

4.2.2 Institutional Challenges

The effectiveness of rent control is heavily dependent on the strength of the institutions
tasked with implementing and enforcing the laws. In Nigeria, these institutions face a range
of challenges:

- Insufficient Funding and Resources: Rent tribunals and state housing authorities often lack
the financial resources, staffing, and training required to enforce rent control laws effectively.
This resource constraint hinders their ability to conduct regular inspections, respond to
tenant complaints, and process cases efficiently.
- Corruption: Corruption within enforcement bodies poses a significant challenge. In some
cases, landlords may bribe officials to avoid penalties for violating rent control regulations.
This corruption diminishes the credibility of rent control institutions and leaves tenants
vulnerable to exploitation.
- Overloaded Judicial System: Many rent disputes are resolved in courts or specialized rent
tribunals. However, Nigeria’s judicial system is often overburdened with a backlog of cases,
leading to delays in resolving rent disputes. This lack of timely justice discourages tenants
from seeking legal recourse, as they fear long delays and costly legal processes.

4.2.3 Economic Factors

The economic realities of Nigeria further complicate the implementation of rent control laws.
The country's housing market is characterized by high demand and limited supply, creating
conditions in which rent control laws are difficult to enforce.

- Housing Shortage: Nigeria faces a significant housing deficit, particularly in urban areas.
The demand for rental properties far outstrips supply, which puts upward pressure on rents.
Landlords, aware of this high demand, often flout rent control laws, knowing that tenants
have limited alternatives.
- Inflation and Cost of Living: With Nigeria experiencing periodic inflation and rising costs of
living, landlords argue that rent control laws prevent them from adjusting rent to reflect
economic conditions. This conflict between protecting tenants and allowing landlords to
maintain a sustainable income from their properties presents an ongoing challenge for rent
control policies.

4.2.4 Lack of Awareness and Education

Many tenants and even some landlords in Nigeria are unaware of the existence of rent
control laws or the specific protections they afford. This lack of awareness limits the
effectiveness of rent control in the following ways:

- Tenant Vulnerability: Tenants who are unaware of their rights under rent control laws are
more likely to be exploited by landlords. Landlords may impose illegal rent hikes, demand

64
exorbitant advance payments, or engage in unlawful evictions, knowing that tenants are
unlikely to challenge these actions due to their lack of knowledge.
- Insufficient Legal Support: Many low-income tenants cannot afford legal representation or
advice. Without adequate support, these tenants are left with little recourse when landlords
violate rent control regulations. Civil society organizations and tenant advocacy groups,
which could provide assistance, are often underfunded and understaffed, limiting their
ability to fill this gap.

4.2.5 Informal Housing Markets

A significant portion of Nigeria’s housing market operates outside the formal regulatory
framework, particularly in informal settlements and slums where rent control laws are
seldom enforced.

- Informal Tenancy Agreements: In many informal housing markets, rental agreements are
verbal and undocumented. These informal arrangements make it difficult to enforce rent
control laws, as there is no official record of the agreed rent or terms of the tenancy.
- Lack of Oversight: Informal settlements are often beyond the reach of state authorities,
making it difficult to monitor and regulate rental practices in these areas. This lack of
oversight allows landlords in informal markets to operate with impunity, charging exorbitant
rents or evicting tenants without notice.

4.2.6 Political Resistance and Landlord Opposition

Rent control is often met with resistance from landlords and real estate developers, who
argue that such regulations distort the housing market and discourage investment in rental
properties.

- Lobbying by Landlords and Developers: Landlords and property developers often lobby
against rent control laws, claiming that these regulations reduce their profit margins and
deter investment in new housing. In some cases, this political pressure leads to the
weakening or repeal of rent control laws.
- Landlord Non-Compliance: Even when rent control laws are in place, landlords may refuse
to comply, knowing that enforcement is weak. This non-compliance, coupled with
inadequate penalties for violations, undermines the goals of rent control and leaves tenants
unprotected.

4.2.7 Bureaucratic Inefficiency

The process of enforcing rent control laws in Nigeria is often bogged down by bureaucracy.
Government agencies responsible for housing and rent control are frequently slow in
responding to complaints and processing cases.

- Delays in Dispute Resolution: Tenants seeking to resolve disputes over rent increases or
illegal evictions often face long delays in getting their cases heard, due to the bureaucratic
inefficiencies in rent tribunals and courts.
- Administrative Barriers: The complexity of navigating Nigeria’s legal and administrative
systems can discourage tenants from pursuing legal action against landlords, even when they
have a valid case. These barriers further weaken the enforcement of rent control laws.

65
CHAPTER FIVE

5: 1: SUMMARY

The Lagos State Rent Control and Recovery of Residential

Premises Edict (1997) was an imperfect copy work. The Edict was a mere
adaptation of Cap 167 of 1994 without any attempt to take up for its
short-comings. The edict was drawn up in haste without regard to the
prevailing socio-economic problems on the country as a whole. It had
repeated the mistake of the post legislation ought to reconcile the
conflicts of interests made complex by inflation in justifiably against the
landlords as if the government were at war against them then. No wonder
the edict never lasted for long.
The truth is that there is no successful rent Control Legislation
where there is shortage of accommodation to meet the very high demand
by the populace. It is time that Government stopped under-estimating the
importance of social security particularly housing in the scheme of
people’s survival. It thus can be said that under a rent Control situation,
maintenance by landlords is discouraged although some of these costs
were shifted to the tenants.

Hence, this shift of maintenance responsibility reduces the benefits

(if any) to be enjoyed in Rent Control. The building conditions are bound

66
to deteriorate simply because they were not being maintained, thereby
lives of the tenants are endangered, thus reduction in the useful of this
buildings too.

With no iota of doubt, a greater number of residential properties

have been seen to unfit, inhabitable and in serious state of disrepair
especially. This is most evident in high density areas due to the low rents
reviewed from these properties.

The inadequate residential accommodation foe letting in Lagos

State can be attributed to the negative effect of the Rent Edict on
residential accommodation. The strength of private landlords lies n the
excess demand for residential accommodation and the limited stock
available are allocated to the highest bidder thereby discriminating
against the poor who edict is intended to protect.
Presently, it could be understood that the edict is extinct and that
the open market forces commands prices of the interest in these
properties. Hence, the absurd prices charge as rent and on sales making
accommodation very unaffordable.

In conclusion, having known the flaws of the edict, it can be

revisited and used to correct most of the wrongs in accommodation
provision in the state.

5:2: RECOMMENDATION

To improve the state of having provision in Nigeria (Lagos),

private initiative should be highly encouraged and at the same time the
masses in mind.

67
 Thus, the cut throat rents must be checked and at the same time
improving landlord and tenants relations hip. The following
recommendations are made:

1. Government should create more Government/Public Housing

Schemes considering the various levels of income groups so as to
compete with the Private sector’s housing development.
2. The use of local building materials should also be encouraged and
this would reduce the cost of construction and the government
should show a leading example.
3. The government can also subsidizes the cost of building materials
so as to increase the level of construction, hence more lettable
accommodation supply.
4. The Private investors should be more encouraged in housing
provision.
5. Land allocation and documentation should be made more easy,
cheaper and accessible.
6. The government also should have to consider housing of her
citizen with a higher priority and more or larger percentage of the
budget should be to housing yearly.
7. Access to land is a major hindrance to housing. Thus, the Real
Estate Sector should be deregulated to enhance access to land.
8. The government should also discourage Rural – Urban migration
which is one of the housing problems creator in states like Lagos.
This can be achieved by meaningful developments created in the
rural areas, hence reducing crowds at the cities.
9. also access to adequate credit facilities to facilitate more ownership
of houses by the masses.

68
10. Also an association of local landlords and tenants can be
encouraged where matters affecting them can be ironed out,
thereby creating a better relationship between landlords and
tenants.
11. In the case of rent control, any standard rent to be fixed should take
account of the age of the building, standard of development and its
maintenance, including the state of repairs.
12. Section 4 of the 1997 edict should be reviewed to address the case
of advance rent in view of the high cost of management and
administration of tenancies as well as the low purchasing power of
the naira.
13. Claims should be allowed for the recovery of cost of repairs and
the time it will take to carry-out such repairs in action of
possessions. This being the case of building materials is not
negligible neither is the time value of money to be
discountenanced. Similarly, outstanding bills (NEPA), tenement
rates, water rates, telephone bills where applicable, consumed by
tenants should be recoverable in the same action.
All these services are billed on the consumer at a particular
location and the bill will continue to accumulate against that residential
unit notwithstanding the fact that the tenant had left.

Above all, it is only when there are in existence sufficient

accommodation to meet the high rate of demand that any move to control
rent can be meaningful. A person who is fortunate to get accommodation
after a long arduous search for it will rather abide by the “living laws”
rather than abide by any legislation in existence and this lead to the
existence of the 1997 Edict.

69
 BIBLIOGRAPHY/REFERENCES

1. PROBLEMS OF PROPERTY MANAGEMENT EXAMINATION

OF LANDLORD AND TENANT COVENANTS BY D.V.F
OLATERU OLAGBEGI. Being a paper read at a national
workshop on THE PRACTICE OF ESTATE MANAGEMENT IN
NIGERIA in 1996.
2. WHY LANDLORDS CANNOT EJECT TENANTS ARBITRARY
by AKINTOLA ALIU JIMOH, RENT JANUARY, 1992
3. HOUSING IN NIGERIA (A book of readings) EDITED by POJU
ONIBOKUN (FNITP), Professor of Urban and Regional Planning
NISSER Ibadan, 1985 pg 133 – 142
4. NIGERIAN LAW OF LANDLORD AND TENANT BY
ONWUAMAGBU, MOSES, LAGOS; AFRICAN UNIVERSITY
PRESS. 1960
5. LAW OF LANDLORD AND TENANT – Interpretative essays by
EMEKA CHIANU (1994) OLIZ Publishers.
6. LAW OF LANDLORD AND TENANTS BY LIONEL A;
BLUNDEL AND V.G. WELLING 26TH ED. VOL. 1 SWEET
AND MAXWELL LTD, LONDON. 1960
7. THE Lagos STATE RENT CONTROL AND RECOVERY OF
RESIDENTIAL PREMISES EDICT (1997): AN EVALUATION
BY I.0 SMITH, 1998.
8. MODERN PRACTICE JOURNAL OF FINANCE AND
INVESTMENT LAW. Vol. 2 No 3 1998.
9. BASIC RIGHTS OF TENANTS UNDER THE NIGERIAN LAW
Vol. 1 by EMMANUEL EGBURUONU (1994).
10. LANDLORD AND TENANT RELATIONSHIP AND THE
PROBLEM OR RENT REVIEW IN LAGOS BY OKWA, J.C.

70
 Being a project submitted to Dept. of Estate Management 1995/96
session.
11. RENT CONTROL AND RECOVERY OF RESIDENTIAL
PREMISES EDICT NO 6 OF 1997
12. THE IMPACT OF RENT CONTROL ON THE MANAGEMENT
OF RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES BY ITUA, O.M. (1998) being
a B.Sc. dissertation submitted to the Department of Estate
Management, University of Lagos.
13. STANDARDISATION OF RENT; THE ECONOMIC
IMPLICATIONS by OMIRIN M.M. (1998) being a paper
delivered at a Workshop/ Seminar organized by the Faculty of
Law, University of Lagos.
14. THE GUARDIAN, Monday April 7, 1997 (pg. 9 and 27)
15. THE RENT EDICT OF LAGOS STATE BY UTUAMA A.A.
(1998) being a paper delivered at a Seminar / Seminar organized by
The Faculty of Law, University of Lagos.
16. LANDLORD AND TENANT RELATIONSHIP: PROBLEMS,
PROSPECTS AND SOLUTION by OLULANA O.O. & others
(1993) being a dissertation submitted to the Department of Estate
Management, YABA COLLEGE OF TECHNOLOGY.
17. THE MERIT AND DEMERIT OF Lagos STATE RENT
CONTROL AND RECOVERY OF RESIDENTIAL PREMISES
EDICT NO 6 of 1997 by KADARA A. O. 1998 being a
dissertation submitted to the Department of estate management
YABA COLLEGE OF TECHNOLOGY.
18. EFFECT OF THE LAGOS STATE RENT CONTROL AND
RECOVERY OF RESIDENTIAL PREMISES EDICT NO.6, 1997
ON LANDLORD AND TENANT RELATIONSHIP IN
SHOMOLU BARIGA AREAS by AZEEZ, S. A. 1999 being a

71
 dissertation submitted to the Department of estate management,
UNIVERSITY OF LAGOS.
19. Robert E. Megarry and H.W.R. Wade, The. Law of Real Property (London:
Stevens, 1975),

72