Tag: Lagos Country Club (LCC)

  • SAN appeals ruling declining  contempt proceedings against LCC trustees

    SAN appeals ruling declining  contempt proceedings against LCC trustees

    A Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Babatunde Fashanu, has appealed a ruling of the Federal High Court in Lagos delivered October 30, 2025  by Justice Ambrose Lewis-Allagoa  Lewis.

    The first respondent in the appeal is the Registered Trustees of the Lagos Country Club (LCC).

    The second to 12th respondents were sued as Caretaker Committee of the LCC, Ikeja pursuant to consent judgment in suit FHC/L/CS/321/2024 while 15 others were listed as respondents.

    In the appeal, Fashanu complained over the whole of the decision of the lower court on October 30, 2025.

    In his application, the SAN is contending that the learned judge erred in law in his decision to to hear the Notice of Preliminary Objection to the court’s jurisdiction to hear the substantive suit first before contempt proceedings for breach of the court’s order of status quo.

    The senior lawyer contended that it was common ground that there was pending before the court contempt proceedings against some defendants/respondents for allegedly breaching the court’s orders of status quo in the suit.

    Fashanu contended that the contempt matter is sui generis and ought to be taken on its own first before hearing the challenge to the court’s jurisdiction with respect to the substantive suit .

    He argued that the court has a duty to ensure that its orders are obeyed and preserve the dignity of the court.

    He submitted the decision is wrong in law in that the contempt proceedings are extrinsic to the substantive suit and ought to be heard before the challenge to the court’s jurisdiction.

    The learned silk argued that it is common ground in the suit that the appellant had contempt proceedings pending for disobedience to court orders of status quo.

    According to him, the defendants did not deny that certain actions were taken after the orders of status-quo were made, including conduct of elections.

    He argued that contempt proceedings are criminal in nature and should first be dealt with by being given paramountcy over jurisdictional matters.

    Read Also: Court grants EFCC’s request for interim forfeiture of N30.7m linked to alleged fraud in NNPC 

    He said it was incumbent on the lower court to first hear the contempt proceedings to preserve the dignity of the court.

    He submitted that the judge misdirected himself in law in deciding to hear objections to the court’s jurisdiction before the appellant’s applications to set aside pre-emptive actions of some defendants.

    The appellant urged the upper court to allow the appeal and set aside the decision of the lower court dated October 30, 2025 to hear the challenge of the court’s jurisdiction first before contempt proceedings.

    He urged the upper court to order that the appellant’s contempt proceedings and application to set aside actions in breach of the court’s orders of status quo be heard first before the challenge to the court’s jurisdiction.

    He urged the upper court to make orders sought in the court below that:

    “Upon the contempt proceedings being form 49 dated July 7, 2025 committing the respondents thereto to prison for contempt of court; Granting the appellant’s Motion on Notice dated 20/03/2025 and Granting the appellant’s Motion on Notice dated 13/06/2025.

    Fashanu also prayed the court to remit the case back to the lower court for hearing on the merits by another judge other than the judge that gave the decision appealed against, Hon. Justice A. Lewis-Allagoa.

    Fashanu and a businessman, Dr Edwards Ademosu had filed seperate applications before the lower court seeking orders  of committal to prison against the  Registered Trustees and Caretaker Committee of the  LCC for disobedience of court orders.

    Fashanu had on July 7, 2025 had filed Form 49 Order IX, Rule 13, Judgments (Enforcement  Rules Cap, S6  Laws Of The Federation of Nigeria, 2004. It was titled, “Notice To Show Cause Why Order of Attachment Should Not Be Made”  against the defendants, including Registered Trustees of the LCC (1st  to 12th defendants) and  13th, 14th, 17th and 19th defendants.

    The plaintiff in Form 49 asked  the defendants to show cause why they should not be “committed to prison for having neglected to obey the order of this court made on the 22nd day of October, 2024” which requires parties” to maintain status quo.”

    Ademosu in his suit filed July 9, 2025 had asked same defendants to show cause why they should not be committed to prison for having neglected to  obey the order of the court made on October 22, 2024 thus: “That parties are hereby required to maintain status quo.”

    “Take notice that you are hereby required to attend the court on the first mentioned day to show cause why an order for your  committal should not be made.”

    In a 14-paragraph affidavit deposed to in support of the motion, Julius Abifarin deposed that despite the service of the court processes by the bailiff  on the defendants, the 1st defendant has continued the very activities sought to be restrained in the plaintiff’ s Motion on Notice of October 3, 2024 including reconstitution of the Caretaker Committee set-up under the Consent Judgment of July 4, 2024 in Suit No. FHC/L/CS/321/24 sought to be set-aside.

     Abifarin stated that on March 20, /2025, a Motion on Notice was filed herein by the plaintiff  to set-aside the said reconstitution and inauguration of the Caretaker Committee of the Club.

    The deponent that by notice a dated 12/04/2025, some members of the Lagos Country Club appointed by the 1st defendant. slated an Emergency General Meeting (EGM) for 28/04/2025 for “Presentation and ratification of the Caretaker Committees review of the report Disciplinary Committee’s Report as directed in the Consent Judgment. ”

  • LCC crisis: litigant wants officers’ inauguration set aside

    LCC crisis: litigant wants officers’ inauguration set aside

    The crisis in  the Lagos Country Club (LCC) has further deepened as another member of the club and business man, Timmy Kolawole has sued the Registered Trustees and 48 others before the Federal High sitting in Lagos.

    The suit FHC/L/CS/657/2025 is before Justice Ambrose Lewis-Allagoa will be heard on July 15.

    Aside Registered Trustees, first defendant, the second  to 12th defendants were sued as members of the Caretaker Committee pursuant to consent judgment in suit FHC/L/CS/321/2024; 13th to 39th defendants were sued as members of the reconstituted Caretaker Committee while 40th to 49th defendants were sued as members of the Electoral Panel 2025/2026 election of the LCC.

    Read Also: Tinubu proposes formal Nigeria-OECS pact to deepen bilateral ties

    In the Motion on Notice filed and dated June 13, 2025,  the businessman is seeking three orders from the court.

    Kolawole through his counsel,  Oladipo Ojo and Babs Animashaun, is seeking an order of interlocutory injunction restraining 13th, 14th, 17th and 19th defendants from acting as officers of the management council of the LCC upon their purported election or in any manner howsoever from managing the affairs of same pending the final determination of this suit.

    The plaintiff is seeking an order setting aside the purported inauguration, investiture and swearing-in of the management council of the LCC held on June 6, 2025, done despite the pendency of the plaintiff’s suit and Motion on Notice dated March 28, 2025 seeking to restrain such activities and service of same on the defendants pending the final determination of the suit.

    He is also an order setting aside the purported election into the Management Council of the LCC, Ikeja held on or about May, 2025 and the Extra Ordinary General Meeting of the club held on June 3,  2025 by  or upon the directives of the Registered Trustees of the club (1st defendant) and or their agents, servants, privies held despite the pendency of the plaintiff’s suit and Motion on Notice dated March 28, 2025.

    The March 28, 2025 motion before the court was seeking to restrain such activities, and service of same on the defendants, pending the final determination of this suit.

    The motion on notice was based on six grounds.

    “The plaintiff in this suit and in his pending motions seeks to restrain, inter-alia, the holding of any Extraordinary General Meeting of the Lagos Country Club or elections into the Club’s Management Council pending the hearing and determination of this suit.

    “Notwithstanding the service of all relevant court processes on the defendants,  the 1st defendant convened an Extraordinary General Meeting at the Lagos Country Club.

    “The reconstitution of the Caretaker Committee and their agenda seek to decide and/or pre-empt some or all of the reliefs sought by the plaintiff in this suit, in particular, composition of a Caretaker Committee and decision on the petitions.

    “The purported reconstitution and inauguration of the Caretaker Committee set up and elections held and inauguration of the Management Council constitute  a breach of the extant status-quo orders made in this suit and is an attempt to pre-empt the hearing and decision of the court in the plaintiffs pending case and applications.

    “That the said actions constitute contemptuous and pre-emptive attempts to deprive the court of the right to hear the plaintiff’s case and pending applications and it is the duty of the Court to take control in stamping it’s authority by setting them aside without more.”

    In his 13-point affidavit deposed to in support of the motion on notice, the plaintiff averred that he filed this suit on March 28, 2025 by Originating Summons seeking answers to some questions he posed and prayed for eight reliefs in terms of declarations and injunctions and crave leave to refer the court to both the Originating Summons and Motion on Notice filed with it and which were served on all the defendant, with proofs of service in the Court’s file.

    He averred that notwithstanding this suit and the pending Motion on Notice, and its agents including the 29th to 49th defendants thereafter conducted elections into the Club’s Management Council which included the 13th,  14th, 17th, and on defendants as candidates notwithstanding the pendency of this suit and Motion on Notice to bar such.

    According to him, sometime in May, 2025, the 18’ Defendant and it’s said agents published a Notice entitled “May 2025 General Election Results” by which persons including the said defendants, the focus of this suit, were said to have  been elected unopposed.

    He averred that thereafter, an “Extraordinary General Meeting” was announced by the preemptive Caretaker Committee set-up by the 1st Defendant during the pendency of this suit and Motions to be held on 3rd June, 2025 and was so held accordingly.

    He stated further that On June 6, 2025, the 1st Defendant purportedly swore-in the said persons said to have been elected into the Club’s Management Council and attached and marked Exhibits “C”, “C1’” and “C2”’, respectively,  true copies of invitations by the 15th defendant and its agents and the 1st defendant’s address at the swearing-in of the Management Council of the Club.”

    The plaintiff said he ‘believe that these actions of the said 1st Defendant and/or its agents being the 29th” to 49th defendants will prevent this Honourable Court from hearing this suit and my said pending Motions on the merits.

    The plaintiff deposed that the said actions of the said 18th defendant and its appointees being the 29th to 49th defendants are contemptuous of the honourable court and if allowed to stand, will render his suit and  said motions nugatory.

    “verily believe that unless the prayers sought in this Motion are granted before the hearing of this suit and the pending Motions, this suit will be rendered

    nugatory.

    “verily believe that it is in the interest of justice to grant the reliefs sought in this motion.” he contended.