Nigeria's real estate industry has a new guiding precedent, and estate agents nationwide are being told to pay close attention. In a ruling that has sent ripples through the property sector, the Supreme Court has held that an estate agent cannot claim commission on the strength of a mere introduction — compensation, the apex court says, must be tied to a demonstrable, enforceable role in actually bringing a transaction to completion. The decision establishes that compensation must be tied to a legally enforceable role in completing the deal, rather than simply introducing a buyer to a property transaction.
The Real Estate Managers and Consultants Association of Nigeria (REMCAN) has since urged its members to take the judgment seriously, warning that the old practice of demanding commission on the basis of a casual introduction — with no letter of engagement, no defined scope of work, and no proof of active participation in the deal — will no longer hold up in court.
The Case: Ojo v. SDV Nigeria Limited The judgment arose from a long-running dispute between Philip Kayode Olusegun Ojo, a professional estate surveyor and valuer trading as P.K. Ojo & Co., and SDV Nigeria Limited. Ojo alleged that he sourced a roughly twenty-acre property at Plots 9, 10 and 11, Awodiora Industrial Estate, Kirikiri, Lagos, for purchase by SDV Nigeria Limited through its agent, Adebola Adejobi, with the property owned by SCOA Nigeria Limited.
Ojo's case was that he had introduced the property and facilitated the negotiations that followed — but that SDV went on to conclude the purchase directly with the owner, SCOA Nigeria Limited, leaving him without payment for his professional services. He sued for US$1.25 million (about ₦161.25 million) in agency commission, plus interest and damages.
The case had a long journey through Nigeria's court system. The trial court partially granted Ojo's claim, the Court of Appeal reversed that decision, and Ojo then took the matter to the Supreme Court. The central legal question was a deceptively simple one that touches almost every property deal in the country: is an estate agent entitled to commission simply because he was the one who introduced the buyer to the property — even without a formal agency agreement?
What the Supreme Court Decided The apex court answered firmly in the negative. The Supreme Court ruled that estate agents are not entitled to commission solely for introducing a buyer, and in Ojo's case specifically found that he had failed to prove that his introduction directly led to the eventual purchase, so his claim for commission was denied.
In reaching this position, the Court set out a clear standard going forward: an estate agent must show active and effective participation in concluding a transaction before commission becomes payable — a bare introduction of a prospective buyer, without evidence of real involvement in negotiations or in closing the deal, does not by itself create an entitlement to be paid.
The Court also reached for a broader principle of contract and restitution law to anchor its reasoning. It held that where a person voluntarily confers a benefit on another such as passing along information or doing unsolicited work — the person who received that benefit is not automatically obliged to pay for it. In other words, goodwill and unsolicited effort, however useful, do not by themselves generate a legal debt.
Why “No Agreement, No Commission” Is the Right Headline The ruling essentially formalises what many lawyers had long suspected was coming: Nigerian courts will no longer entertain commission claims built on informal, undocumented arrangements. Three elements now appear central to any future claim:
A clear engagement — some form of contractual authority or letter of engagement establishing that the agent was actually retained to act.
Effective cause — proof that the agent's actions were the operative cause of the eventual sale, not simply one early step among many that the buyer and seller later completed on their own.
Active participation — documented involvement in negotiations, not just a one-off introduction. Absent these, an agent — however experienced or however real their initial contribution — risks walking away from a completed, sometimes highly lucrative, transaction with nothing to show for it.
Industry Reaction: REMCAN's Warning to Members Against this backdrop, REMCAN has moved quickly to alert its members that the judgment is not a technicality to be brushed aside but a decisive shift in the rules of the trade. The association's message to agents is straightforward: treat every engagement as a paper transaction from day one. Get a signed letter of engagement before doing any work. Keep records of every negotiation, site visit, and communication with the buyer or seller. Do not assume that being the first person to mention a property to a buyer is enough to guarantee a fee months or years later when the deal finally closes.
For an industry where deals have historically been sealed with a handshake and a phone introduction, that is a significant cultural adjustment — but one the Supreme Court has now made unavoidable.
The Bigger Picture Commentators following the case have noted that the ruling arrives at a moment when Nigeria's property market is already under pressure to professionalise. Analysts expect the clearer legal standard to encourage proper documentation of agency agreements, more clearly defined roles and responsibilities for agents, and stronger compliance with emerging regulatory frameworks — all steps seen as necessary to build trust in the market and attract institutional investment. Separately, Lagos State lawmakers have also been considering reforms to cap and regularise agency commissions, a sign that both the courts and the legislature are converging on the same conclusion: informal commission practices are increasingly a thing of the past.
For estate agents across Nigeria, the lesson from Ojo v. SDV Nigeria Limited is now unambiguous — and REMCAN's warning to its members captures it in five words: no agreement, no commission.