Court halts Lagos takeover of widow’s estate

A Lagos State High Court has granted an interim injunction restraining the Lagos State Government and four other defendants from taking possession of or interfering with a disputed property belonging to an 80-year-old widow in Lekki Peninsula Scheme I. The order, issued by Justice E.O. Ashade, will remain in effect pending the hearing of a motion on notice.

The suit was filed by Chief H.A.K. Shonowo, acting on behalf of herself and the estate of her late husband, Chief Owodiran Olusoga Shonowo. The defendants include the Lagos State Government, the Attorney-General of Lagos State, the Governor of Lagos State, Mr Gary Sanusi, and Dillon Consultants Nigeria Limited. The claimant's lawyer, Babatunde Oni (SAN), argued that his client had suffered hardship due to the defendants' actions and urged the court to preserve the property.

“

I am unable, therefore, to find any cogent reasons why the application of the claimant/applicant should be refused, as I find the arguments of the learned senior counsel to be meritorious. I am, therefore, inclined to agree with the submissions of the learned senior counsel that it is in the best interest of justice to grant this application.

The disputed property comprises 11 units of four-bedroom terrace houses, three units of three-bedroom flats, one two-bedroom flat, and a commercial shop, situated on approximately 4,000/4,300 square metres at Block 113, Plot Health Centre, Lekki Peninsula Scheme I. Justice Ashade found that the claimant had established sufficient grounds for the interim relief, stating that it was in the "best interest of justice to grant this application."

The judge also highlighted the legal principle that parties involved in a pending case must not take actions that could impact the court's jurisdiction. "It is trite law that when a court is seized of a matter, parties should not do anything that will impact on the jurisdiction of the court to entertain the matter in any manner whatsoever," Justice Ashade held. The court noted that the actions complained of by the claimant could hinder its ability to determine the suit if the defendants were not restrained. The interim injunction also prevents the fourth and fifth defendants from handing over the property to any party until the pending application is determined.

“

It is trite law that when a court is seized of a matter, parties should not do anything that will impact on the jurisdiction of the court to entertain the matter in any manner whatsoever.