PROFESSIONALS in the private and public sector, last week agreed that there are several issues omitted in the Lagos State new Tenancy Law 2011, and such creating room for criminality and complicity in the process of discharging their responsibility of property management and allied duties.They came to the conclusion after listening to a paper: 'Tenancy Law In The Social Context: The Lagos State Tenancy Law 2011 In View,' by the newly elected Dean, Faculty of Law, University of Lagos (UNILAG), Professor Imram Oluwole Smith (SAN), during the Real Estate Lawyers Association of Nigeria (RELAN) Breakfast Roundtable. The event brought together lawyers, estate surveyors, realtors and other professionals.Notwithstanding the problems associated with the new law, participants at the forum agreed that the state government actually meant well in introducing the law, but failed to engage quality draftsmen, who wrote the law.Smith's presentation followed spontaneous questions and comments by most of the participants, who wondered why a law meant to solve social problems, would end up creating more' But some of them still asked how best they could operate without breaking the law and at the same maintaining the best standard of practice'Prior to the lecture, Mr. Adekunle Omotola, a legal practitioner, had hinted that RELAN decided to continuously feature topical issues in its breakfast roundtable, that affect real estate industry, hence the choice to discuss Lagos Tenancy Law 2011. He encouraged all stakeholders to pay necessary attention with a view of getting better in their practice.The Lagos State Governor, Mr. Babatunde Fashola had in August last year signed into law the Lagos Tenancy Law 2011. The law repealed the Rent Tribunals (Abolition and Transfer of Functions) Law 2007. It was described as 'a law to regulate rights and obligations under tenancy agreements and the relationship between the Landlord and the tenant including the procedure for the recovery of premises and for other connected purposes in Lagos State'.An important provision of the Law is that it prohibits a landlord from demanding or receiving from a sitting tenant, rent in excess of six months for a monthly tenant and one year from a yearly tenant irrespective of the nature of theOne area of contention is the restrictive application of the Law. Apapa, Ikeja GRA, Ikoyi and Victoria Island are exempted from the application of this law. The rationale behind the exemption appears to be that the tenants in these areas are predominantly corporate bodies and high net worth individuals.The assumption is of course that tenants in this categories are better able to define the terms of their tenancy with their respective landlords.But on severa fronts,Prof. Smith punctured the law. Some of the areas considered include: applicability to certain forms of occupancy, exclusion of certain areas from the ambit of the Law and defence of title in tenancy claims.Other areas are payment and receipt of advance rent, unreasonable increase in rent, payment of service charge, security deposits and professional fees, tenant's compensation for improvement, the landlord's obligations and balancing of interests, issuance of notices, service of notices, notice required for abandoned premises among others.According to Smith, the new law has failed to recognize the social, economic peculiarities prevalent. For instance, he said in a situation where the law forbids landlords to demand more than six months from a sitting tenant, that stipulation gives room for both the landlords to increase rent, saying the law failed the define what it meant by 'unreasonable increase in rent', saying their was no benchmark, parameter and yardsticks with which unreasonable increase could be determined.In respect of professional fees and related charges, Smith, who is also the first Vice Chairman of RELAN said, the tenants are still at a loss, as most of them are likely to act of duress to get accommodation not minding the associated charges that come with the rent. Another big issue, as said by the Professor was tenant's compensation for improvement. He added that it was common knowledge that most landlords would encourage their tenants to improve on their apartments, but the new law has made it more difficult for the tenants to make claim for the money spent.The Don, who said that Section 9 of the law was grossly inadequate, on the ground that the penalty prescribed captured subsection H only but left out A-G, adding this lacuna was from the draftsmen, whom he said did shoddy job.It was not all woes as the new law now encourages arbitration towards resolving all disputes between landlords and tenants, though arbitration without judicial pronouncement, would not be binding on the parties.In his own submission, Mr. Segun Talabi, a lawyer, had said that the law was silent in determining the terms of a contract or regulating the conduct of parties, saying it is the exclusive preserve of the parties. 'Applying this in the strict sense to a landlord/tenant relationship, it would mean that the landlord is at liberty to let his property on whatever terms he deems suitable. He may fix the duration of the tenancy, specify his desired rent as well as the payment intervals and may terminate the relationship and repossess the property in whatever fashion he chooses without any restrictions from statute. Such wide discretions are prone to abuse by any landlord and could be injurious to the interests of the tenant.
Click here to read full news..
