The Expressway Revocation at Ogunmakin

Heads of compensation. Section 28(6)(a) of the Land Use Act 1978 permits revocation for public purposes; section 29 sets out what is compensable. The claim should be built under these heads: (i) the land - a statutory right of occupancy is a proprietary interest and section 29 includes the land as a head of compensation, although the statutory basis of assessment often produces a modest figure compared with open market value, so confirm the formula the Ogun State Lands Bureau actually applies; (ii) unexhausted improvements at the date of revocation - warehouse, office block, quarters, fence, borehole and site works, valued by depreciated replacement cost; (iii) damage to the retained 1.8 hectares - severance and injurious affection, since access, layout and use may be impaired; (iv) disturbance and resettlement - removal costs, stock relocation, staff costs, loss of profit during relocation and professional fees.

The valuation date. Compensation is assessed as at the date of revocation or service of the notice (1 March 2026), not the Ministry's valuation date of 1 March 2025. With replacement costs up roughly 30% over the year, the earlier date systematically understates the buildings. This is a quantified point, not an appeal for sympathy.

The two objections. 'The land vests in the Governor' describes radical title and is irrelevant to the statutory compensation scheme; revocation for public purposes does not extinguish the holder's right to be compensated. 'Unapproved structures are valueless' confuses planning control with value: the buildings exist and are unexhausted improvements, and whether the planning authority could have enforced against them is an argument for counsel. Value them as they stand, and separately quantify the cost and risk of regularisation so the tribunal can see the components. Disclose the lack of approval - do not let it be discovered later.

The tenants. Each tenant has its own claim - disturbance, removal, fit-out and loss of goodwill - separate from the landlord's. Notify them in writing of the revocation, ask for their schedules, and make sure the landlord does not claim their fixtures or their disturbance losses; double claiming is the fastest way to lose credibility before the committee or the court. If the landlord claims the capital value of the leased parts, it should either account to the tenants for their interests or claim only the reversion and the rent for the 18 months unexpired. The leases limit what can be claimed with vacant possession, so build the claim on the investment value subject to the leases, or on capital value with the tenants' interests carved out.

The bank loan. The charge covers the whole six hectares. With the client's written authority, tell the bank: compensation money may be paid to the mortgagee or released only with the bank's consent, and the loss of 4.2 hectares may breach a loan-to-value covenant. Advise the client to engage the lender early, obtain a release or partial discharge over the affected area, and confirm whether the bank wants the compensation applied to the debt.

Confidentiality. Send nothing to the bank without the client's authority; a valuer acting for the claimant does not answer to the lender.

The 30% uplift. Refuse to add an arbitrary percentage. The correct response to a stale valuation date is to value as at the right date: obtain current replacement-cost evidence, apply a proper depreciation allowance for age and condition, value the land on the statutory basis, and build the disturbance schedule from invoices and cost estimates. Where evidence is thin, indexation may be used, but it must index a specific measured cost (for example, published building cost indices) and be shown transparently - not a flat uplift applied to the whole claim. An arbitrary 30% invites the Ministry to dismiss the entire schedule.

The contingency fee. A fee of 10% of whatever is recovered is a contingency fee. It is inconsistent with the independence expected of a valuer and wholly incompatible with any later role as an expert witness, where the duty is to the tribunal and not to the party paying. The other side can ask about the fee arrangement and use it to attack the evidence. Decline it and put a time-based or fixed fee in writing, with disbursements.

What to do instead. Prepare a reasoned claim with a schedule of heads, measurements and photographs, current cost evidence and a statement of assumptions; send it with a covering letter inviting the Ministry's valuer to a without-prejudice meeting; keep contemporaneous notes of every negotiation. If the offer does not move, the client's remedy lies in the statutory compensation process and, if necessary, litigation, in which your report becomes expert evidence. Independence is the asset that makes the report worth having.