Quiet Enjoyment

Breaches follow a familiar Nigerian pattern, and they usually arise during a dispute about rent.

Disconnecting electricity or water. Changing the locks. Removing doors, windows or roofing sheets. Sending people to intimidate the tenant. Entering the premises without notice or consent. Blocking access to the compound or the gate. Persistent unannounced visits.

Each of those is a breach of the covenant, and importantly, none of them becomes lawful because the tenant owes rent. Rent arrears give the landlord a route to recover the premises through notices and the court. They do not give a right of self help.

A tenant facing this should document it immediately: dated photographs, a written complaint to the landlord, records of who was present, and any police report where there was intimidation. A letter setting out the breach and demanding restoration resolves many of them, because most landlords doing this believe it is permitted rather than knowing it is not.

Where it continues, the remedies are damages and an injunction restraining further interference.

Self help by landlords is the single most common breach, and Nigerian courts have been clear about it.

A landlord who wants a tenant out must serve the correct notice to quit for the tenancy type, then the notice of intention to recover possession, then apply to court. Only a court order executed by the appropriate officer lawfully removes a tenant. Everything else is unlawful, and the fact that the tenant has not paid for a year does not change it.

The practical consequence for landlords is that self help converts a strong position into a weak one. A landlord who was owed rent and would have obtained possession becomes a defendant to a claim for damages, and the arrears become a set off in a case they are now losing.

A landlord's right of entry is the related point. Agreements commonly reserve a right to enter to inspect or repair, on reasonable notice and at reasonable times. That reserved right is what makes entry lawful, and a landlord entering outside it is trespassing on premises they own.

For tenants, the practical advice is to write rather than to argue at the gate. A dated letter recording exactly what was done, demanding restoration, and stating that damages will be claimed, is what a court will look at, and it frequently ends the behaviour on its own.

Three related landlord obligations that address different problems.

Quiet enjoyment addresses interference. The landlord must not disturb the tenant's use of the premises, and it is breached by disconnection, lock changes and unauthorised entry.

Repairing obligations address condition. Who fixes the roof, the plumbing and the structure is a matter of what the agreement says, and in the absence of express terms the position depends on the type of letting. A landlord who fails to repair is in breach of that covenant, not of quiet enjoyment.

Non derogation from grant addresses undermining. A landlord who grants premises for a stated use must not then do something on adjoining land that makes that use impossible, such as blocking the only access.

A tenant locked out is complaining about quiet enjoyment. A tenant with a collapsed ceiling is complaining about repairs. A tenant whose shop entrance has been walled off by the landlord's own works is complaining about derogation from grant.

The covenant protects against the landlord and those claiming through them. Interference by a stranger, or by a neighbour with no connection to the landlord, is not usually a breach, though it may be a nuisance claim against that person.

It also does not oblige the landlord to keep the premises in repair. That is a separate obligation and it depends on the terms.

A reserved right of entry limits it. Where the agreement allows entry on notice for inspection or repair, exercising that right is not a breach.

And damages for a short interference may be modest, so the practical value of a claim is often the injunction and the deterrent rather than the money.