Engineer Appeals N152m Refund Ruling, Demands Apartment Handover in Oak Homes Dispute
Translated from English, summarized and contextualized by DistantNews.
At a glance
- A Nigerian-American engineer is appealing a Lagos High Court ruling that declared his property purchase agreement with Oak Homes extinguished by novation.
- The court had ordered a refund of N152 million for two luxury apartments, dismissing the engineer's counterclaim for handover or damages.
- The engineer argues the trial judge misapplied contract law, ignored evidence, and wrongly placed the burden of proof for payments on him.
A Nigerian-American engineer, Anthony Ehiedu Ugbebor, is taking his property dispute with developer Oak Homes Multinational Services Limited to the Court of Appeal in Lagos. He seeks to overturn a Lagos State High Court judgment that declared his agreement for two luxury apartments extinguished by novation and ordered a refund of the N152 million he paid.
The original case was filed by the developer, Olukayode Olusanya, and Oak Homes against Ugbebor and the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC). While the High Court dismissed most of the developer's claims, it found that the parties' actions effectively terminated their initial contract through novation. Consequently, the court ordered Olusanya and Oak Homes to refund Ugbebor's payment but rejected his counterclaim for the apartments' completion and handover or, alternatively, damages.
Ugbebor's appeal challenges Justice Akingbola George's June 15, 2026 judgment, asserting that the trial judge erred in several ways. He contends the judge misapplied contract law principles, disregarded crucial evidence, wrongly dismissed his counterclaim, and incorrectly refused his claim for specific performance of the sale agreement.
Central to Ugbebor's argument is that the trial court wrongly placed the burden of proving payments on him. He maintains that the original agreement's payment schedule was tied to construction milestones, not fixed dates. According to his appeal, he had paid approximately 80 percent of the purchase price, even as the developer allegedly failed to meet the agreed construction milestones, such as completing the roofing stage and the apartments themselves.
Originally published by ThisDay in English. Translated, summarized, and contextualized by our editorial team with added local perspective. Read our editorial standards.