In my last article on co-ownership, I defined Co – Ownership as the right to the ownership of a Property by more than one person, such that on the death of any of the joint owners, the deceased owner’s portion of the property passes to the surviving owner or owners of the property. Today, I am writing on the Right to own property between a Husband and his Wife.

A husband and wife have the authority and right to own property separately in their own name without restrictions.  A wife has the right to own or acquire property and sell it at any time she wishes without restrictions from her husband. This same principle goes for the husband.

In a court case, Aderounmu v Aderounmu [2003] 2 NWLR (pt 803) 1. The wife (respondent) acquired property with the Deed Conveyed in her name with her husband the (appellant) attesting as a witness to her signature. The wife built on the land and the family resided in the house as their matrimonial home. In the petition for divorce, the wife sought an order of a mandatory injunction to order the husband to vacate the house. The court granted her claim. The man was stopped by the court from contesting the respondent’s title to the land.

In other words, it suffice to say that where there is a dispute between a husband and his wife over a landed property, the law would give the property to the person whose name has been used to purchase the document.

In a case between a husband and his wife, Idirisu v Obafemi [2004] 11 NWLR (pt 884) 396. The husband (plaintiff) an employee of public corporation claimed that he bought the land in dispute in his wife’s name in other to conceal his identity as a civil servant. In an action to recover the land, his wife denied claiming that she bought the land in dispute with her funds. The plaintiff (husband) had no way to prove that he bought the land because the entire purchase document was in her name. The case was dismissed and the property was given to the wife.

There is a presumption in law that if a husband buys a property in the name of his wife, it is presumed that the husband intends to give it to her as a gift for her advancement or development in life but with adequate evidence, this presumption can be invalidated. This means that the burden of proof is on the man to give evidence. Until then, the property remains his wife. In contrast, this principle does not apply to the husband. There is no advancement or development from a wife to her husband. For example if a husband buys property in his name with the advancement of his wife’s money, he merely holds such property in trust for his wife and does not own the property.

It seems that this laws and principles above are in favor of the women and not the men. A quick review of all the laws in Nigeria has shown that it actively protects women rights and interest especially in matters related to land/landed property and inheritance. Nevertheless, these rights and protection of interest by the law is limited. For instance, what will be the position of the court were a wife makes claim to a property which is in her husband’s name and where she has no contribution to the acquisition of the property. The Nigerian court will not give claim of a property that is in the opposing party’s name to a spouse unless the spouse can show evidence that he or she contributed to the acquisition of the property. If there is a well-kept record of contribution to the property, such record will be given a greater weight in evidence than a mere testimony which might not be admissible when there is a dispute over recovery of matrimonial home or divorce proceedings.

In a decided case Amadi v Nwosu [1992] 5 NWLR (pt 241) 273. The appellant’s husband (respondent) sold his house which served as matrimonial home and moved to another part of the city. The appellant (wife) refused to vacate the premises. The respondent purchaser sued her for trespass. In court, the appellant could not support her claim that she had interest in the house with evidence. All she had was mere testimonial evidence and had no evidence to support her testimony. The case was stroked out by the Supreme Court.
In another case, Nwanya v Nwanya [1987] 3 NWLR (pt 62) 697. The respondent (wife) in a petition for divorce claimed that she contributed 6,000 naira to build their matrimonial home which was in her husband’s name. The claim was dismissed as she was unable to give evidence to her claim
However, in Coker v Coker [1964] Lagos LR 188. The plaintiff and defendant were husband and wife before the marriage dissolved. The matrimonial home was built jointly by them on a piece of land which was gifted to the wife by her father. The husband bought a booklet of a sweepstake and caused some of the tickets to be made out of his name and some in his wife’s. A ticket purchased in the wife’s name won a substantial sum of money which was applied toward the building of their matrimonial home which was in their joint names. In an action brought by the husband, the court held that the house was jointly owned by both of them. There was no doubt that the land gifted to the woman by her father was a substantial contribution to the matrimonial home.
It suffice to say that a wife or husband cannot claim joint ownership of their matrimonial home unless to prove beyond reasonable doubt that either party has contributed to the building or purchasing of such home.
I have always advised my client’s that when buying a joint property for husband and wife, it is wrong to buy in joint name, for example Mr & Mrs Femi Joel. The right name should be Mr.Femi Joel, and  Mrs Remi Joel. The former is not known to law.
For further assistance, explanation, or consultation on this subject matter or any other land/property related issues, do not hesitate to contact me [email protected] or Call 08034869295.