LAND LAW FIRST SEMESTER NOTES

Topic: The Dual System of Land Tenure in Sierra Leone

In discussing the land tenure system of Sierra Leone, one primary referral is section 5 (2) (a)
of Act No. 6 of the 1991 constitution of Sierra Leone it states “sovereignty belongs to the
people of Sierra Leone from whom Government through this Constitution derives all its
powers, authority and legitimacy”. However, it unfortunately failed to state to whom the
territory of Sierra Leone belongs. I.e. who owns the territory of Sierra Leone?

However, there is a foundational common Land Law principle in other common wealth
jurisdictions which says that all lands belong to the crown and land owners are tenants of
the crown.

Sierra Leone is governed by two systems; they are the Western Area and the provinces. The
western area is govern by the General Law, it means the acquisition of land in the western
area is govern by the general law and the general law is made up of the English Common
Law and statutes of general application received by section 74 of the Court Act of 1965 up to
the 1st of January 1880. Apart from the English Common Law and statute of general
application we also have what we call Imperial Statute, Law of Property Adoption Act, if you
look at these particular statues you will see that there were Acts of Parliament enacted in
Britain after 1880 but they are being adapted by our jurisdiction, that is why we called them
the Adaption Act. For example the Conveyancing Act of 1882, it was enacted in England
after 1880 so generally it is not applicable as per section 74 of the Court Act of 1965 but as a
law we thought it wise that the provisions contain therein are relevant, they suit the Sierra
Leone context so what they decided to do was to adapt that particle act so that it is now
applicable in our jurisdiction, the law of Property and Conveyancing Act of 1881 is also
another that was enacted after 1880 but it was adapted as such it is now applicable and now
part of our judicial system. (Statute) .

For the provinces we have what we called Customary Land Tenure System, so what it
means is that in the provinces Land is govern by the customary laws. Customary land tenure
in the Provence classified into three:

 Family land
 Communal land
  Individual land

Family lands: they are land held under family tenure from which ownership is traced to an
ancestor and there must be a common decent. A family member could say I have an interest
in this land because we share the same clan, lineage or kindred. The term family is used in
different meanings but for Sierra Leone customary land law we will take that of Prof. Joko
Smart’s in P.11 Sierra Leone customary family law to mean either residential family units
and or the unilateral descent groups such as lineage. In Tongi v Khalil a West African CA
case, it was held that where land has been allocated to an individual member of the family
and had been developed by him, such property transfers to his immediate heirs upon his
death.

Communal land: the land belongs to the community as a whole. Unlike family land, it is not
a kinship group but a socio-political entity from which title to land in a given community is
claimed by or on behalf of the community as well.

Individual land: the concept of individual land ownership under customary law is foreign not
only in Sierra Leone but West Africa as a whole. The leading authority is the case of Amadu
Tijanin v Secretary Southern Nigeria (1921). This view however, no longer holds in current
time that an individual cannot become a fee simple owner of land in the provinces as we can
now see individuals owning lands in the provinces.

For now there are different methods in which an individual can acquire lands in the
Provinces.

 The first one is by clearing virgin forest lands

The second one is by outright purchase. It was established in the locus classicus case of
kormor v Coosah 1960-61 that a native that acquired a communal land can sell such land
and the buyer is deemed to be a fee simple owner. This view was further stated in Jah v Deen
1970-71 when During J.A said
“It is clear and settled native customary law that a member of the tribe to whom land has
been allocated has a right to sell or pledge a house owned by him and situated upon such
land…..”


 The third one could be by deed of gift
 The fourth one could be by long possession
 By partition

We cited the Limitation Act of 1961, if we look at section 1(32), it provides that this Act is
not applicable to lands in the provinces I.e. the issue of adverse possession is not applicable in
the Provence. However, in certain circumstances the court will apply the equitable principle
of Laches acquiescence to prevent one from reasserting ownership of the land in question. In
Sitia Tribal Authority v Official Administrator of intestate 1937 wherein the P claimed a
piece of land in sherbro island that had been sold for a valuable consideration and conveyed
by one predecessor to Macfoy a British subject who according to law cannot own land in the
province. However, Macfoy and his successors had enjoyed 70yrs undisturbed possession but
the P claimed that such sale was not valid in law since Macfoy was a non-native and could
only lease land in the province. The Supreme Court of Sierra Leone applied the principles of
equity and held that it would be wholly inequitable to deprive the D of the property for which
they have held for so long in undisturbed possession.

Looking at section 21 (a) (1) of the Court Act of 1965, it provides that the High Court does
not have the original jurisdiction to hear and determine titles to lands in the Provence. It
only has an Appellate Jurisdiction to hear and determine title to lands in the province,
matters coming from the District Appeal Court. Section 15 (3) (a) of the Local Court Act
(2011) tells you that these local court has the original jurisdiction to hear and determine title
to lands in the Provence.

Under customary law we also have relevant Acts that govern land in the province, we have
the Provinces Land Act Cap 122, and we also have the Tribal Authority Act cap 61.

The Provinces Land Act was formally known as the Protectorate Land Ordinance of 1927.
If we look at the preamble of the Provinces Land Act cap 122 it state that all land in the
provinces is vested in the chiefdom council who holds such lands for and on behalf of the
native community concern, it means the chiefdom council is the custodian of all lands in the
provinces, by this it means it has the power to administer , control, and manage the land
policies on behalf of the land holding family members (because we all know that generally
Land in the provinces is own by family members), not only the Provinces Land Act, even
section 28 (d) of the Local Government Act of 2004, it state that the chiefdom council act
as trustees for the lands in the provinces.

The interpretation section of the Provinces Land Act also state that a non-native is someone
who is not entitle by customary law right to a land in the provinces.

If you look at Section (3)1 of the province Land Act, it makes it very clear that for a non-
native to acquire a lease hold interest in land in the province, he must obtained the consent
of the chiefdom council and the chiefdom council comprises of the paramount chief of the
chiefdom and all the principle men in the said chiefdom. In Kamanday Bongay,
paramount chief of Big BO chiefdom, for and on behalf of the tribal authority of Big Bo
chiefdom V F.S Macauley 1932 where land was granted to a non-native and has so occupied
such land for 30 yrs and later he started planting economic trees and ask his sub tenants not to
pay tribute to the paramount chief. The Tribal Authority subsequently brought an action for
forfeiture and the court rule in favor of the tribal authorities on the basis that the D no longer
has the tribal authority’s consent. They succeeded. If you look at section (3)2 of same it states
that a non-native who wants to acquire a lease hold interest in land in the provinces must
seek the approval of the District Officer in the district. Section (4) of the same Act also
state that a non-native cannot become a Fee Simple owner of land in the province, it means a
non-native cannot purchase land in the province, the only thing he can do is to enter into a
lease agreement the property maybe lease to him but such property cannot be sold to him
because he is a non-native. Under the same section, it provides that if a non-native wants to
lease property in the provinces the lease can be granted for a term not exceeding 50 years,
however, after the expiration of the 50 years the lese may be renowned for a further term of
21 years.

Now section 6 of the Act state that any term of years which is 3 years and above shall be
executed by deed.
What makes the differences between a lease and a tenant? Generally they are the same but if
the term of the years is 3 years and above it has to be executed by a deed and it will then be
called a Lease Agreement but if the term of the years is less than 3 years then it does not
need to be executed by a deed and it will then be called a Tenancy Agreement so the
fundamental requirement is that for a lease it has to be in writing, it has to be by deed but for
tenancy maybe partly writing and partly oral and it is not a requirement to be executed by a
deed. When we look at section 9 of the same provinces Land Act it gives the formalities to
lease a land in the provinces. On the part of the lessor, the lease in question should be
executed in the presences of two witnesses before the District Officer. On the part of the
lessee the lease shall be executed in the presence of two witnesses before the Magistrate
in the district. In Agip SL ltd v Edmask and PC of Kakua chiefdom and chiefdom
council 1972-73, the court inter alia stated that failure to register a lease in compliance with
S.9 renders the lease voidable not void.

Say for exam purpose: what about a situation, I am a non-native I enter into a lease
agreement then as a lessee I take my two witnesses to the magistrate of Magburaka so that
they are going to sign it, so what advice are you going to give in that respect? In advising, it
could be stated that it failed to comply with the formalities set out under section 9 and
because of that the lease has become voidable, so what they need to do is to draft another
lease and execute it in the proper jurisdiction.

Section 13 of the Act state that if you are a non-native and did not have any lease hold
interest to a land in the province but you occupied land in the province, in that circumstance
you are required to pay a Settler Fees on an annual bases to the paramount chief of the said
chiefdom. However, if for example I employ a non-native and the non-native is leaving with
me then the non-native is not required to pay a settler fees.

A conductive reading of the Provinces Land Act Cap 122 and the Tribal Authority Act could
give us the following information about a non-native:

Firstly, for the purposes of land tenure system in the province unless the person is a native he
cannot purchase land in the provinces.

Secondly, individuals who did not fall within the ambit of the term native are regarded as
Nonnatives.
Third, a non-native can be a citizen of sierra Leone, born in Serra Leone, raise in Sierra Leone
or leave in Sierra Leone but under the Provinces Land Act he is still regards to as non-native
even though he is a citizen of Sierra Leone, so this particular information has an important
ramification for the krios because if you look at the interpretation section it states that a
nonnative as long as your personal law is not customary law you are a non-native and we all
know that there is nothing like the customary laws of the krios. That is why a krio cannot
contract a customary law marriage as per law.

However, it is important to note that such provisions are discriminatory as per section 27 of
the constitution of Sierra Leone Act no 6 of the 1991.

However, with variation in the different traditional practices it is of important to note that one
cannot just come from one district to another to purchase a land wanting to obtain advantage
of him being a native. Some traditions will have a condition imposed on you.

The western area

Generally, We all know that prior to independent most of West Africa was under British
colonial rule and the territory were considered as being possessed by the British and the
inhabitants in these territories were considered as British subjects, were as for the French they
are considered as French citizens because of the policy of assimilation where as in the British
we have the indirect rule. So it is very clear that during the colonial period, all lands in the
western area belongs to the crown where as in the protectorate when the protectorate was
declared in 1896 the British government only exercise limited control in the protectorate and
the land in the protectorate was not regarded as land belonging to the crown whereas the
western area all the lands are regarded as lands belonging to the crown.

Land in the western area could be broadly classified into two, so in the western area, we have
two broad Categories of lands. The first one is State Lands and the second one is Private
Land. So if you look at the interpretation section of the State Land Act No 19 Laws of Sierra
Leone 1960, state land is referring as all lands belonging to the state by virtue of a treaty,
cession or agreement or all lands which have been or may be hereafter acquired by or on
behalf of the state for public purposes or otherwise.
Now, the difficult aspect as far as this Act is concern is that even the government doesn’t
know by way of acreage the extent of government owe lands because there is no
comprehensive survey on those lands; as such government is still struggling to identify all
state lands. However, we still have lands that were handed over to the Sierra Leone
government after the end of the colonial era; these lands were surveyed by the British and
could be clearly identified by the Sierra Leone government. There are various status that we
can rely on to identify these lands, some of them are:

 The Defence Lands Act Cap 119

 The Admiralty Land Act Cap 123
 The War Department Land Act Cap 124
 The Kroo Reservation Act Cap 127

 The ordinance lands act cap 125

Apart from these acts we also have some local legislations that give the state the power to
acquire lands compulsorily or to have title thereto vested in the state by judicial
pronouncement an example of such statutes is the Public Lands Act Cap 116, this act
originally provides for the compulsory acquisition of lands by the government in the western
area but by virtue of the S.4 sub 2 of the laws of adaptation act 1972 which provides that
every existing law shall be deemed to apply throughout sierra leone unless expressly or by
necessary implication is limited by law to a specific area notwithstanding the provisions of
S.8. Any individual so deprived under this act shall be compensated pursuant s.14-20 and as
Macquarrie L.J in RE Public lands ordinance 1920-1936 said the claimant for
compensation shall show a title which shall be presumed by the court as a valid and
unchallenged title. there is also the town and country planning act cap 81, the forestry act
cap 189, the unoccupied lands act cap 117 which provides for the director of survey to
claim any piece of land as state land if, in his opinion, such land is unoccupied within the
meaning of the act and the Escheat act cap 20 as well and the state lands act 1961 which
pursuant S.7 grant government the right to re-enter land for the prospective mining of
minerals.

Private lands in the western Area: Generally there are two ways in which individuals can
acquire lands in the western area.
First: when the state grant land to such individuals or from someone who had derived title
either directly or indirectly from the state. A grant pursuant S2 of the state lands act 1960
includes a grant for an estate in fee simple, a lease or any license to the grantee to hold and
occupied state land and the authority for the granting of state land pursuant S. 3 and 4 of the
state lands act is vested in the minister of lands country planning and environment which may
be exercised either by him or a public official in his behalf.

Secondly, by adverse possession pursuant to section 5(3) of the Limitation Act 1961. This is
where an individual has occupied a particular piece of land in the Western Area for a
continuous period of 12 years and he is never challenged it means now that he has right of
that particular land by virtue of adverse possession. Pursuant S 11 of the act adverse
possession does not bear any technical meaning but simple possession by the D inconsistent
with the title of the true owner. In Mansaray v Williams 1968-69 despite the fact that the
appellant had been in possession for more than the required time frame, he was not held to
have been in adverse possession because there was earlier evidence that the relationship of
landlord and tenant still subsist between the parties and the D does not assert any right which
is inconsistent with the P’s right. Non-Citizens Interest In Land Amendment Act Of 1966 As
Amended By Act Of 1968.

This Act regulates the acquisition of land by non-citizens in the Western Area, section 3 of
the Act is very clear that for the mere fact that you are a non-citizen you cannot purchase land
in the Western Area. A non-citizen is an individual who is not a citizen of Sierra Leone and at
the same time it can be a body corporate or incorporate (It could be a foreign company) as a
company is a legal person.

But however, the act provides that if a non-citizen wants to acquire land in the western area,
he will have to do so through a body corporate company and of importantly is that in the
membership of that particular company the foreigners should not be more than the locals.

However, if we look at this Act unlike the provinces Land Act it says that for a non-citizen to
be granted a lease hold interest in the western area, he must obtain a license from the board (a
body set up to regulate lands in the Western Area) which comprises the Minister of Lands,
The Minister of Trade and Industry, The Minister of Finance, The Minister of Development
and The Attorney General.
If you look at the Registration of Instrument Act Cap 256 as amended, it provides for the
registration of instruments.

Examples of these instruments are:

√ Deeds of Conveyancing
√ Deed of Gift
√ List Document
√ Power of Attorney - Power of attorney (POA) is a legal authorization that gives a
designated person, termed the agent or attorney-in-fact, the power to act for another
person, known as the principal. The agent may be given broad or limited authority to
make decisions about the principal's property, finances, investments, or medical care.

√ Deed Poll - A deed poll is a legal document that proves a change of name. You can
change any part of your name, add or remove names and hyphens, or change spelling.
There are 2 ways to get a deed poll. You can either: make an ‘unenrolled’ deed poll
yourself or apply for an ‘enrolled’ deed poll

What we learn from the Registration of Instrument is that even though there is this kind of
duality we can see that there is an overlap because Conveyances in Freetown can be
registered; conveyances also in the provinces can be registered. The same for lease hold
document, lease hold document in the western area can be registered the lease document also
in the provinces can be registered so we see there is an overlap covered by a single statute
which is the Registration of Instrument.
One can also buy land from another fee simple owner for his private use in both tenures. The
Law stipulates that the deed of conveyance of such purchase must be registered within 10
days if executed within the Western Area; 60 days if executed in the Provinces; and one year
if executed at some other place other than Sierra Leone. Alternatively, where a deed has not
been registered within the statutory period, the Registration of Instruments (Amendment) Act,
1964 Act empowers the Court to grant an extension of time to register the deed, provided the
court is satisfied that “... Failure to register was not due to any fault of the applicant; or, the
applicant’s failure to secure registration in time was, in all the circumstances of the case,
excusable.’’ This extension time can be very lengthy at times. In Supreme Court civil appeal
1/80 – GRACE JOHNSTON v YVONNE NICOLS & YVETTE DAVIES, the Supreme
Court upheld, by a majority, the decision of the Court of Appeal that failure to register a deed
made in 1967, 6 years later, was excusable.
READING ASSSIGNMENT: Different interests exist simultaneously on land and each is a
right enforceable by each interest holder. Discuss.

Tips: I’m the fee simple owner of a particular land, it means I have a free hold interest in it
meaning I can dispose of the property at any time, I can device it by deed or by deed of gift

because its mine, now I want money I say ok let me lease this property to Mr. B. Then Mr. B

leases the property, Mr. B will then have a lease hold interest in the land. (If anyone

trespasses on that land Mr B can take an action of trespass against that person because he has

a lease hold interest on that particular land). Now if someone wants to cause a substantial

destruction on that land then as a bona fide owner I can step in and take an action against that

particular person for a trespass I land because it is against my interest in the land as a fee

simple holder. Then Mr B, because he has a lease hold interest in the land (let say a lease of

50 years) decides to erect a dwelling house and after erecting the dwelling house he decides

to rent out the premises to Mr C for a term of two years, now Mr C has an interest in that

particular house because he is a tenant, then Mr C as a tenant says that he is not going to

leave in the house and decided to sublet to Mr D. then Mr D will own an interest in that land

because he is a sub tenant, then as a subtenant he says let me grant a licence to Mr E. so that

he can organise an agriculture show in this particular land for a particular consideration so

Mr E has a licence now has an interest in the land as a licensee.

Different Interest

The Fee Simple Owner

The Lessee and the Lessor

The Tenant and the Land Lord

The Subtenant and the Tenant And

The Licensee and the Licensor

 Sometimes between the lessee and the tenant you can have the mortgagee and the
Mortgagor.

ANSWER

Interests in land is the right recognized by law to use a land to the exclusion of all other
persons. This interest in land is broadly classified into legal and equitable interest.

LEGAL INTERESTS IN LAND.

The most absolute way of acquiring a legal interest in land is through the fee simple method
of ownership. The fee simple owner is an owner who exercises complete dominance and
ownership of a piece of land and all the properties on it and it is inheritable by the heirs of the
owner. In a contract for sale of land, the purchaser after the completion of the purchase is
deemed as a fee simple owner. There is also the interest of life estate which is similar with the
fee simple owner in terms of dominance of ownership but here, the land is not inheritable by
the heirs of the life estate owner.

A fee simple owner or even a life estate owner as the case may grant another individual an
interest in the same land he so own through the creation of lease. Lease is define in
Woodfall’s law of landlord and tenant as the grant of a right to the exclusive possession of
land for a determinable term less than that which the grantor has himself. Thus, a fee simple
owner can grant a lease for even a period of thousand years since this term of years is still
less than that of which the lessor has because his interest is infinite. However, a life estate
owner who grants a land in lease for a period of time may nullify that lease even before the
term of lease expires if he so dies before such term. In Street v Mountford 1985, Lord
Templeman set out the requirement for a valid lease are:

Exclusive possession, fixed term and a rent in form of payment or premium. However, in AG
securities v Vaughan, the court took a different approach and held that for a legal lease to be
effective, there must be:

 Possession which is exclusive

  An interest which is undivided
 Time which should be certain
 Title to such. That is the estate is created by a document.

Whenever a leasehold interest is created, the lessee will have the legal interest to the land and
can even sublease or rent but the lessor will have a freehold reversionary interest in the land.

A lessor or any person of such title can grant a tenant or sub lessee an estate for a period
shorter than that of his. In an instance where a lessor grants an interest to another tenant for a
term shorter than his, he will have a leasehold reversionary interest in the land. As established
in the spencer’s case no covenant in the lease between the lessor and the lessee will be
enforceable to the sub lessee or tenant as the rule of privity of contract stipulates.

The tenancy interest acquired from the lessee of any person capable to pass such title can be
created by either:

 Periodic tenancy
 Tenancy in common
 Tenancy at will
 Severance

The difference between a tenancy agreement and lease agreement has been held to the
duration. And pursuant cap 122 a tenancy agreement is an agreement for not more than 3yrs
anything more than that is deemed as a lease agreement.

A tenant may grant an interest to a sub tenant in form of sub tenancy agreement which should
be shorter in time than his own interest. He or a subtenant may also grant a license to a
licensor for the use a land. Such licence is deemed as contractual license which originally
were only enforceable in personam as held in Cowell v Rosehill Racecourse ltd and hurst v
pictures theatres 1556 wherein damages were granted for a breach, however, it has been
held to be enforceable in rem in Verall V Great Yarmouth BC 1981 wherein the court
granted specific performance over damages.

A legal interest can also be created in the form of mortgage. Lindley LJ in Santley v Wilde
1899 defines mortgage as a conveyance of land as a security for the payment of a debt or the
discharge of some other obligation for which its given…. If the mortgagee fails to pay the
debt, then the mortgagor will have an interest in the land at the expiration of the mortgage
period.

EQUITABLE INTEREST IN LAND

 The interest of a beneficiary under trust grants the beneficial an equitable interest in
such land.
 Interests under estate contract to a third party. If A contracts B for the sale of house to
be given to C, C will not be able to bring a claim in common law if B fails to honour
this contract because of privity to contract but C will have an equitable interest in such
land and can bring a claim in equity if B fails to honour the contract.
 Interest in an estate contract of agreement to sell. This comes under the equitable
doctrine of conversion which stipulates that where A, purchaser and B, vendor has
agreed for the sale of a Land. A will be said to have an equitable interest in the land
while B holds the legal right thus B cannot sell the land to any other person except A
as held in Fletcher v Ashburner.

In conclusion, in as much as it is well recognized in law that a piece of land has only one
owner or group of owners, there exists different interests which can exist in the land.
scenarios to explain this can be:

 A, the fee simple owner of Plot X and Plot Y and Plot Z of land. A lease Plot X land
to B, lessee for 99 years and then B decides to sublease to C, sub lessee for 50 yrs and
C, sublessee build low cost houses on the land and rent one of the houses to D, a
tenant for 2yrs and D decides that since he will be travelling overseas for 6 months it
will be useless for him to leave the house unoccupied and therefore rent E, sub tenant
for 6 months and E enter into a contract with F a company to hold a two day
conference at the house. A has also placed Plot Y to G to hold it in trust for his son, H
until he attain the age of 18 years. A has also enter into a contract of sale of land for
Plot Z to I and payment should take place on the 20 th November 1990 and then A died
on the 18th November.
The legal interests existing in this instance are:
B has a leasehold interest in plot X
C has a sub-leasehold interest in Plot X
 D has a tenancy interest in Plot X
E has a sub tenancy interest in Plot X
F has a license interest in Plot X
G has a legal interest in Plot Y as a trustee
H has an equitable interest in plot Y as a beneficiary
I has an equitable interest in plot Z and he can convert this equitable interest to legal
interest when he performs his own part of the agreement.

The Doctrine of Tenure and Estate

The Doctrine of Tenure

It could be remembered that during our Sierra Leone Legal System we stated that when we
look at the origin of the common law, we cannot talk about the common law without
mentioning the Feudal system and the English feudal system was at the center of the English
common law. We also stated that William conquered England 1066, he secured victory at the
battle of Hastings where he replaced the Saxon kings with Norman governors hence the
emergency of the English common law by virtue of the Norman conquest of 1066.

Now after William had conquered England what he decided to do was to reward those who
supported him with pieces or percales of land. The principle then was that all land in England
was held on the crown, meaning the king was the ultimate owner of all land in England. You
cannot be the king of England without being the owner of all lands in England. By then what
use to operate was that the king would grant land to those who supported him directly and
those who held land direct of the king were referred to as Chief Tenants. These were the
ones who provided direct services to the king, so these chief tenants then in turn will grant
land that they held to other inferior tenants. Then these inferior tenant will grant same land to
tenant of their own. So in essence we have what we called subinfeudation, these
subinfeudation refers to the process where the king granted land to chief tenant sometimes
refers to as Immediate Overlords on conditions that these immediate overlord should
provide certain services for the crown. This process of transfer was common until prohibited
by the statute of Quia Emptores 1290 which effected that only the king was entitled to grant
new tenures. One of these conditions could be the provision of men to fight in the King’s
army.
 SUBINFEUDATION

Supreme Feudal Lord (Owner of The King All Lands)

Chief Tenants Also called Immediate Overlords. Held

Land Direct of the King)

Inferior Tenants Held land from the Chief Tenants

Tenants of their own

So by then we had about three distinct tenures that were operating the first one tenures in
Chivalry, which is also refer to as military tenure, the second one is the common socage, the
last one is the Spiritual tenure. What we are trying to say is that the types of land held by the
tenant depends on the types of service rendered by that particular tenant. That is why a clear
definition of tenant is that it primarily focuses on the way in which land is held. So it all
depends on the manner and quality of the tenant holding, it also stipulate that the crown or the
state is the ultimate owner of all land and the citizens are tenants of the crown. These three
distinct types of tenures are explain below:

1. Tenant in Chivalry: these type of tenure existed were individuals provided a certain
number of individuals to fight in the kings war and when that happen the land that
was granted to those individuals was referred to as tenure in chivalry or military
tenure. But this was later modified by King Henery the II. He converted it in the form
of payment of a certain amount and King Henry the II would use that amount to hire
foreign solders. So in essence you are no longer required to provide men but some
forms of payment in which the king will use to buy his foreign solders.

2. The Common Socage: The Common Socage existed where individuals were required
to provide some form of agricultural services to their immediate overload so the types
of tenure that they held was referred to s the common socage. So all individuals who
are required to provide some form of agricultural services to their immediate overlord
held what is called common socage.

3. Spiritual Tenure: here the tenants were required to provide some form of prayers to
the immediate overload who granted this supply of land. So the type of tenure that
was held was Spiritual Tenure.

However they recognized that with time this feudal system was very cumbersome and was
posing so many difficulties and challenges to tenants, immediate overlords as well as the
crown or the king and these therefore lead to the enactment of a particular stature called
statute called

Statute of Quia Emptores, also called Third Statute of Westminster, English law of
1290.
This particular statute abolished the practice of Subinfeudation.
By virtue of the Tenures Abolition Act 1660, converted the tenures above in to what we call
free and common socage. And the other word for it is Freehold, and Freehold is the only
recognized tenure that we have.

During this system the common laborers were referred to as Villein Tenants and the tenure
that they held was referred to as villeinage also known as copyhold. We said freehold in the
sense that the tenure in question was reserved for free men where as for the common laborers
they were not regard as free man so because of that they have no role to play in the feudal
system but the tenure that they held was called villeinage and there are certain features of
villeinage that are not applicable to other tenures, say for example under villeinage the tenant
held the land at the will of the lord, meaning at any time his lord can evict him from the land.
But however, by the end of the 15th century the court started to recognize the right of the
Villein Tenants. So the principle was that before a Villein Tenants is evicted by his
immediate overlord the eviction must be done in accordance with the customs of the manor
(a large country house with land surrounded with smaller houses) so one of the principles of
the feudal system that is very important today is the principle of what we called escheat what
it means is that if someone died without any heir (successor) and that the person left a
particular property that real property will go to the crown and this particular principle is
recognized in our jurisdiction today pursuant to section 16 of the Devolution of Estate Act
2010. The copy hold tenure was finally abolished by the law of property act 1925. If
someone died intestate and there are no next of kin, no surviving spouses etc the property in
question will be declared as bona Vacantia (Without an owner) in that case the property
goes to the state.

In summary, we can analyses the following points:

1. The tenant held the land but they did not own it
2. There was never an outright transfer of ownership of the land from the crown to the
tenant.

3. The tenant hold a duty of loyalty to their immediate overlords and that duty is refer to
as fealty
The Doctrine of Estate

Generally, when an individual acquires a peace or parcel of land what he had was an estate in
land and when we talk about estate in law what we mean is an interest in land in terms of a
specific duration. So if you have an estate in land it depends on the duration that you are
going to have the land for, how long would your interest in that particular land lasts. In the
walsingham case 1573 the court said the land itself is one thing and the estate is another
thing. For an estate in the land is a time in the land or land for a time…… That is why we
have what is called the fee tail estate, the fee simple, and the life estate.

Fee Tail Estate (Estate in Tail)

This is derived from the term Feodum Taillatum which means a cut short fees. The statute of
Westminster II passed in 1285 created this form of estate also known as statute De Donis
Conditionalibus). A fee tail estate is an estate in land limited to a particular class of heirs. In
other words we can say it is an estate of inheritance in real property that can’t be sold or
alienated by the land owner but passes by operation of law upon the heirs of the land owner
when he dies. Traditionally a fee tail estate is created by words of grant in a deed for example
the words in a deed stating “To "A" and the heirs of his body.” So if I am drafting a deed
creating a fee tail estate, the original grantor that means the original land owner is going to
state in the deed that I am going to convey this particular property to To "A" and the heirs
of his body, so once you see these particular words it means that a fee tail has been created,
this will means that only the heirs begotten by the grantee can inherit the estate. So if for
further clarification, a particular estate was conveyed to M. S. Sesay, it is only the direct
children of M. S. Sesay that can inherit that particular estate, but however if M. S. Sesay did
not have any children then the property will be referred to the original grantor, the estate
cannot be sold, it cannot go to any other relative. In Williams v bollingbroke king 1922-45 a
sierra Leonean testator devised real property to “B, his heirs and assigns forever, as tenants in
common, but in the event of b dying without issue, to C and D, the sons of A, as tenants in
common, and after the death of C and D to their heirs and assigns forever”. In Sawyer v Rose
1960-61 a devise to A with limitation that such property was to descend “from children to
children created an estate in tail. It is important to note that the essence of creating a fee tail
estate is to ensure that the land stays within the family.
A very important consideration is the position of an illegitimate child, can he or she inherit a
fee simple estate? In answering this question our direction is the adaption Act in which it is
stated that if you want to give legitimacy to your son the law requires that you will first have
to adapt that particular son even though he is your biological son. In the walsingham case
1573 the fee tail was described as “time in the land …. For as long as (the grantee) has
issues of his body”. It is possible to convert this to fee simple through an inter vivos
declaration done by the grantor and the grantee stating that the land henceforth is been held
on as a tenant for life.

Types of Fee Tail Estate.

1. A Fee Tail General: A fee tail General it mean only the descendants of the grantee can
inherit. These Descendants could either be sons or daughters or both.

2. A Fee Tail Female: only the daughters can inherit. It is normally created with the
following statement: To "A" and the heirs female of his body"

3. A Fee Tail Male:. It is normally created with the following statement: To "A" and the
heirs
Male of his body"
4. A Fee Tail Special: this one is limited to a certain class of heirs. An instance of this can be
conveying your property to your favorite son. If for instance you have three children but
you are only interest in one because of the way he treats you as a father, you can convey a
fee tail special

only for him.

Types of Fee
Tail Estate

Fee Tail Fee Tail Fee Tail Fee Tail

General
Female Male Special
Life Estate
This is an estate that is measured by the life of another. The owner of a life estate is referred
to as a Life Tenant. The simplest way in which a life estate is created is by the following
words expressed in the deed "To ‘A’ for life.” It means that ‘A’ is going to be the owner of
this particular land as long as he is alive. When he dies this particular land could be referred
to the original grantor.

Another way in which a life estate is created is as follows "To A for the life of B". It means
‘A’ will continue to be the land owner as long as ‘B’ is alive, no sooner ‘B’ Dies the land
may be reverted to the original grantor. Pursuant the settled lands act 1882 adopted under the
imperial statutes, where the life estate is created as part of a settlement, the powers of the life
tenant are still governed by the aforementioned act.

Types of Life Estate

1. Life Estate in the Life of the Tenant: this type of estate is meant the life of the
tenant. So it means if the tenant of the life estate then the estate will revert to the original
grantor.
2. Life Estate Pur Autre Vie (For the Life of another): this is measured by the life of
another other than the life tenant. For Example, “To Mr. B for the life of C” So what it means
here is that as long as Mr. C is alive Mr. B will continue to be the owner of the land.

Another point worthy of note is the fact that it is possible for us to create a life estate with a
Reminder Man. This sort of life estate is normally created with the statement “To Sankoh
for life and Ahmed as to the remainder interest.” In this life estate, the reminder Man is
Ahmed so it means this is my estate and I have decided to convey the estate to Mr. Sankoh
for life and Ahmed as the reminder Man. It means when Mr. Sanko.h die the property will not
be referred to me the grantor but rather Ahmed as the Remainder Man. The remainder man
will then be the fee simple owner. But however, if Ahmed dies before Mr. Sankoh ten the
property reverse back to the original grantor.

An overriding feature of this is that Mr., Ahmed who is the remind man because he has a
future interest of the land can also sell this particular land and the person buying the land
cannot be in possession of the land until Mr. Sankoh dies because what he bought is the
future interest of the land.

Importantly also to note is that a life tenant has the right to sell the estate but when he dies the
buyer who happen to be the new owner will lose his interest in land. Here in this instance,
you cannot say you are a bona fade purchaser for value because the estate that is created is a
life estate. Just that the new owner would bring an action against you to recover his money. It
is advisable therefor when you want to purchase a particular estate, you first need to know
whether the particular estate is a life estate of a fee simple estate.

However, because you are a life tenant the law does not preclude you from selling, you can
sell, and the law doesn’t also preclude you from leasing the property. You can lease it for 20,
30 up to 50 years if you so wish, you can also rent but when you die the original grantor will
take possession of the said land.

Fee Simple Estate

It means it is an inheritable estate. That means an estate that can be inherited. Simple is an
adjective which indicates that the fee is an ordinary form as opposed to a Fee Tail what that
means is that the inheritance is unrestricted. In general a Fee Simple Estate is an estate that
will last as long as the original grantee is alive and the interest that he has in the estate will be
transferred to his heirs or survivors. So what it means is that upon the death of the fee simple
owner, his heirs or successors will have an interest in the estate that is his interest will be
transferred to his heirs because his estate is a fee simple Estate. However, what is important
to note is that the fee simple owner can defeat the heirs claimed. First he can do that by inter
vivos (among the living or while alive) that is if I am the owner of a fee simple estate then I
have the right to sell it that is to convey it to another person in that case I have deprived my
children from inheriting the land because I have sold it to another person. In other words we
can say it is an estate that can be alienated by inter vivos where by defeating the heirs claim.
Secondly, it can be devised by will, so now even though I have kids but because it is my
property and as a testator I have the right to give my property to whoever I likes and then I
say no I am not going to name my children in this will instead I will say this real property
will go to charity, by so doing you have defeated the hires claim, because the way you
prepare your will to which you device this fee simple estate that it is charity organization that
is entitle to this estate when I am gone by then you have defeated the hairs claim to this
property by will. In general terms in the word of Black Stone he says a fee simple estate is an
estate that is virtually last forever. That is a time in the land without end. According to S.18
imperial statutes adoption act cap 18, a conveyancing of freehold land to any person
without words of limitation or any equivalent expression operates to pass to the grantee the
fee simple or whole interest the grantor has to convey in such land, unless contrary intention
appears. Contrary intention appears where the grantor only have a life interest in the land, in
that case the grantee’s interest lies in life estate pur autre vie of the grantor pursuant S. 28
and 34 wills act 1837.

Types of Fee Simple

Estate Fee Simple Absolute: if there are no circumstances in which a fee simple Estate can
be cut short we can say it is a fee simple absolute. These circumstances can be seen in either
express words in the grant or in the will. In general we can say at any time we talk about a fee
simple absolute what we mean is that the estate in question is not subject to any qualification
or determination. In essence the impression we have is that it is estate that endorsed forever.

Estate In Qualified Fee Determinable: A fee simple estate that specifies the limitation with
respect to the estate. For this estate if the new owner fails to comply with the terms of the
limitations, the estate may revert to the original grantor. So this estates makes provision for
the automatic reacquisition of the estate. For better understanding it could be further
explained by saying if Mr. Kandeh owns a fee simply estate and wants to convey a fee simply
estate to Mr. Jalloh but there is a particular limitation that Mr. Jalloh I am going to convey
this fee simple estate to you but a particular portion of that particular estate should be used for
agricultural purposes only, if Mr. Jalloh now decides to use that particular portion that has be
limited for other purposes that are not agricultural then that particular estate will
automatically be reverted to Mr. Kandeh because it is an estate in qualify determinable.

Estate in Qualified Fee Condition: this is also a fee simple estate in which the original
grantor stipulates a condition that the grantee must not violate. For example in a situation
where Sia is a fee simple owner she is going now to convey her estate to Dennis on condition
that the estate should be used for industrial purposes only. So if Dennis uses that estate for
another purpose, Sia has a remedy and the remedy is that she has a right to reenter in the
estate to stop what is happening there or take a legal action to recover the estate unlike a
qualified fee determinable. A primary difference between Estate in qualified fee determinable
and that of estate in qualified fee condition is that once a condition has be violated the
original grantor has the right to reenter the estate, it does not call for automatic unlike a
qualify fee determinable. For a qualified fee determinable it is automatic whereas for a
qualified fee condition it is not automatic even though the condition has be violated, it is up
to the original grantor to exercise her option which is either to reenter, to stop or to bring an
action to recover the estate whereas for a qualified fee determinable it is an automatic
reacquisition of the estate. In Universalist society v Boland 1892 an American case in a
common law state wherein an estate was conveyed to the P “so long as said the real estate
shall by said society or its assigns be devoted to the uses, interest and support of the faith of
the society of Universalists”. The P enter into a contract for sale with the D who opted not to
buy anymore after discovering this provision in the deed. The P sue the D asking the court to
specifically enforce the contract. The court ruled against the P and J. Allen said

“The words used in the conveyance do not grant an absolute fee, but an estate which is to
continue until the happening of a certain event and then to cease…… it is usually what is
called a condition or qualified fee”.

Words of Purchase Words of Limitations

for words of purchase these are words of grant in a deed that tell us who takes interest in a
real property where as words of limitations are words of grant in a deed that tell us how long
will that interest last. Say for instance, if there is a deed of grant that states “to Sankoh for
life”. Here “to Sankoh” are the words of purchase, because they tell us who takes interest in
the property, while “for Life” tell us how long will his estate last, and it is as long as he
remains alive, meaning he is a life tenant as such his interest will end upon his death thus “for
life” is an example of words of limitation. Another example can be “to Sankoh until Sia
marries”, “to Sankoh” is an example of words of purchase “until Sia Marries” is an example
of words of limitation. In May v Williams 1950-56 the testator devised property to his
widow “and their legitimate children after them forever” kinglsey CJ held that the words for
ever were words of limitation and the words legitimate children construed as creating an
entail confined to those legitimate children they had.