By Dickson Jere
A woman owned a huge farm in Ndeke – Lime Area – in Ndola. She had Certificate of Title to the land, which was legally given to her by Ministry of Lands.
Unknown to her, Ndola City Council (NCC) decided to offer people plots on the same farm between 2004 to 2006. Those that accepted the offers, paid and also had their building plans approved by the Council before they started constructing houses.
When the woman visited her farm, she was perplexed to find houses and some people had even moved in (fifty four houses). She demanded that they vacate her land but they refused saying they were given the land by the Council. The matter ended up at the Ndola High Court.
After a protracted trial, the Judge ruled that the houses could not be demolished or the owners removed because of the developments and some of the houses were even completed. The Judge ordered that Council should instead compensate the woman for having taken her land.
Unhappy with the Judgment, she appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that she could not be forced to sell her land nor removed to pave way for the “squatters” whom she did not allow on her land.
Three Supreme Court Judges heard the case and held that the woman owned the land and that she cannot be forced to sell to pave way for “squatters”.
“The appellant, as the title holder to the property in question, is entitled to quiet possession and enjoyment of the whole property,” the Judges said, ordering the developers to vacate the land forthwith.
“The development on the land having become part of the land shall, in keeping with the law as we have explained it, now vests in the appellant landowner,” the judges said.
Simply, the Supreme Court ordered that the houses now belong to the woman who will decide what to do with them as they were built by squatters on their own risk.
The Court further ordered that those who built the houses should compensate the woman for trespassing on her farm and for loss of use of land to be assessed later.
“What is clear is that the appellant was not selling her property. She is entitled to quiet enjoyment of the whole of her farm,” the Judges noted, adding that the High Court Judge made a grave mistake to protect the trespassers.
“We entertain no doubt whatsoever that the lower court’s reasoning in coming to its decision was demonstrably wrong. It finds no support in law and just a little in reason,” they said, adding that the Judge used morality and not law.
The Judges also took a swipe at the Ndola City Council whom they accused of being corrupt.
“The Present dispute is also in many respects paradigmatic of the rot in the administration of many local government authorities in the country; breakdown of orderly systems, epitomized by a highly casual and suspiciously corrupt manner that animates land allocation by these authorities in many instances,” the Judges said.
Case citation – Prisca Lubungu v Obed Kabango and Others and Ndola City Council (Appeal No. 216/2016).
What a brilliant judgement. The Court used the Roman Law doctrine “quicquid plantatur, solo solo cedit” which simply means that whatever is fixed to the land becomes part of the land and therefore the owner of the land owns everything on it!
