G. B. Ollivant Ltd V. Sir Adeyemo Alakija (1950)

LawGlobal Hub Judgment Report – West African Court of Appeal

Landlord and Tenant—Right of purchaser of reversion to claim rent paid in advance by tenant to former landlord—Effect of purchaser having actual or constructive notice of such advance payment.

Facts

The respondent became the landlord of the appellants, having bought the right, title and interest in the property of one da Silva at a sale in July, 1947, made by the Sheriff under a writ of fi. fa. and obtained the usual certificate of purchase. The trial Court found as a fact that at the sale the bailiff announced that rent had been paid in advance, and that this statement was heard by the respondent’s agent, who attended the sale on his behalf and bid for him.

The appellants had been granted three leases of the property, the second lease being current at the date of the sale. In April, 1944, during the currency of the second lease, the appellants made two payments of rent in advance. The first payment covered all rents up to the end of the second lease and was evidenced by a receipt which stated that the payment completed all obligations under the second lease. The second payment covered the first thirteen years of the third lease.

The respondent gave notice to the appellants immediately and required them to pay rent to him from the 1st of January, 1948. The appellants refused on the grounds that they had already paid. The respondent took action in the Supreme Court against the appellants, claiming forfeiture of the lease for non-payment of rent, and for rent for the year 1948, which was part of the first payment covered by the receipt already mentioned. The trial Judge gave judgment for the respondent, following certain decisions to the effect that where rent has been paid in advance, the assignee of the reversion has a right to recover again from the tenant rent due after notice of assignment.

The appellants appealed on the ground that where the tenant has paid his rent in advance to the landlord, prior to the sale of the reversion, the purchaser of the reversion with actual or constructive notice of such payment cannot claim to be paid again.

Held

per Ames, Ag. C.J. It was still good law that, normally, where rent has been paid in advance the assignee of the reversion has the right to recover again the rent due after notice of the assignment; but that rule did not apply m the special circumstances of this case.

The receipt given in respect of the first payment of rent in advance was more than a payment in advance and amounted to an acceptance of a lump sum in discharge of all rent to become due Wider that lease. After that transaction the lessors could not have sued the appellants for any rent due under that lease, and the respondent could not be In a better position.

Held: per Blackall, P. A purchaser is affected by notice of an equity where 2e has come to the knowledge of his agent in the course of the transaction. The mespondent had not only constructive but actual notice of the appellant’s equity.

In these circumstances it would be clearly inequitable to permit the respondent to exact from the appellants a rent already paid.

Appeal allowed.