|
|
|
PROPERTY NEWS
Federal staff appeal court's verdict over sale of 1004 Estate
By Emmanuel Badejo
Published:Guardian, 24th August 2009
FFORMER residents of one of the nation's premier residential estates, once owned by the Federal Government - the 1004 Estate on Victoria Island, Lagos - have filed an appeal contesting a decision of the Federal High Court, which some months ago, said it lacked jurisdiction to entertain their case against the sale of the property.
The appellants, all of whom are senior federal civil servants, in their notice of appeal, are challenging the lower court's decision and at the same time seeking a reversal by the appellate court. They also want the appellate court to adjudicate on the matter or compel the lower court to assume jurisdiction and thereby examine the matter on its merit.
Justice Charles Archibong's verdict had washed the hands of the court off the matter, citing jurisdictional incompetence. Before hearing commenced, one of the defendants had filed an objection challenging the jurisdiction of the court to try and determine the matter.
Ruling on the application, Archibong had said it was improper for the court to enquire into the dispute on the ground that it did not have jurisdiction. The verdict, which led to the termination of the case, came several months after the Federal Government 'concluded' the sale process that saw the transfer of 1004 Housing Estate on Victoria Island to private investors.
Placed before the appellate court is a request to cancel the sale on the allegation that the deal followed a flawed process and was contrary to the earlier agreement between the Federal Government and its workers. But no date has been fixed for hearing.
The civil servants claimed to have occupied the prime property until the government executed its monetisation policy that led to the controversial sale of the property.
Twenty-four applicants, led by one Mrs. Umma Mohammed, had sued for themselves and on behalf of all the residents of 1004 flats, Victoria Island. They cited the Minister of Environment, Housing and Urban Development with five others - the Attorney General of the Federation, the Chairman of the Implementation Committee on Federal Government Landed Property, UACN Properties Limited (UPDC) and another firm 1004 Estates Limited as defendants.
Their application, which is by way of a writ of mandamus, is coming under an order for judicial review of an administrative action. The implication of this application is that the court will decide the matter on written documents placed before it. That, in practice, often avoids the usual delays associated with litigation through advocacy.
In their further affidavit endorsed by Chairman of the Residents Association, Mr. Sunday Adejoh Baba, the applicants said that they were unlawfully evicted from the said property on or about December 9, 2005 and that the group, which purportedly won the bid for the property, was yet to pay for the complex, saying this was also contrary to the stipulations in the bid conditions.
The claims as chronicled before the trial court include:
- That sometime in the year 2003, the Federal Government of Nigeria came up with a policy of monetisation of fringe benefits in its public service;
- that the relevant part of the policy states that government residential quarters across the country would be sold off at the end of the first year of the policy with their current occupiers being given the first option to purchase the quarters at competitive prices; and
- that after the announcement of the policy, the applicants met on diverse dates to consider the effect on them of the implementation of the policy, particularly with regard to the proposed sale by the Federal Government of the residential quarters being occupied by the applicants and their families.
According to the applicants, they did not protest against the policy at the time of its announcement because of the declaration by the government that the applicants would be given the first option to purchase the quarters, a decision, which allegedly led them to raise funds at their own expense in readiness for the commencement of the sale of the quarters by the government.
They said that when the government eventually invited bids for the property, however, they were excluded from purchasing the flats though other civil servants who had similar experience, particularly in Ikoyi were given the opportunity of biding first for their homes.
Essentially, the applicants are asking that they should be permitted to exercise their right of purchasing the property. "The applicants are demanding that the subject matter be offered to them for purchase on the same terms and conditions as the other federal civil servants that were permitted to exercise their rights of purchasing their apartment in line with the said monetisation policy," the affidavit states.
In their response, the four government agencies recalled that the decision of the Federal Government to sell the disputed property was one of the recommendations made by the Brig.-Gen. Rotimi Commission of Inquiry saddled with the task of arranging the alienation of Federal Government landed property.
The government agencies said that the occupants of 1004 Estate failed to consider it necessary to constitute themselves into a consortium or group for the purpose of bidding for the estate as directed by the Presidential Implementation Committee.
Besides, the agencies said that in order to qualify for the auction, the legal tenants or any individual or corporate body was expected to submit an application form and pay the requisite bid fees as stipulated. The first to fourth respondents denied the claim that the fifth and sixth respondents did not pay up for the property as stated by the regulating policy of alienation.
In their words: "The paragraph 11 of the applicants' further and better affidavit is false, as the fifth and sixth respondents validly bided for and won the bid for the purchase of 1004 Estate and did pay in full for the property."
The first four respondents stated that the government at no time discriminated against the applicants, as all civil servants, Nigerian citizens, individuals or corporate bodies were given equal opportunities. They added that the sale of the estate had been done by public bid and the estate had been sold and possession handed over to the 6th respondent upon payment of the bid price and title had passed to the 6th respondent as purchaser for value.
In their counter affidavit, both UACN and 1004 Estates Limited claimed to have taken over the ownership of the property after a successful bid at a public auction conducted by the government's implementation committee on Federal Government landed property.
They said that a consortium of companies, including UBN Properties Limited, UACN Property Development Company Plc and LFS Perspectives Limited, led by the 5th respondent bided for the purchase of the subject matter on behalf of the 6th respondent.
After satisfactorily fulfilling all the conditions, the last two respondents claimed, the purchase of the subject matter of the action was issued in favor of 1004 Estates Limited. They are claiming that the government had said that it would execute its monetisation policy on fringe benefits on residential accommodation for civil servants, specifically on the highest bidder consideration.
The present owners also debunked claims that they did not pay for the property when due. "The purchase price of the subject matter has long been paid, consequently, the Federal Government handed over to the sixth respondent vacant possession of the subject matter of this action."
It added that "the sixth respondent is a corporate entity having the sole responsibility of protecting her investors' interests and investment, thus the huge investment by its investors in the purchase of the property, a sale that took place without any control or influence over the Federal Government Implementation Committee on Federal Government Landed Property."
|
