Lagos Country Club: Appellants Head To Appeal Court, Seek Judge’s Recusal From Suit

IKEJA – The Lagos Country Club is embroiled in a high-stakes court battle, with executives and members locked in a dispute over alleged contempt of court orders.

The appellants have filed a notice of appeal against the Federal High Court’s decision to prioritize a jurisdiction challenge over contempt proceedings.

The appeal cites seven grounds, including the lower court’s alleged error in prioritizing jurisdictional issues over contempt proceedings.

Recall that, on July 7, 2025, the appellants filed contempt proceedings against the Registered Trustees and some members of the Management Council of the Lagos Country Club for disobeying court orders of status-quo.

The respondents, led by The Registered Trustees, filed a counter motion to challenge the court’s jurisdiction on the matter.

In his ruling on October 30, 2025, Honourable Justice A. Lewis-Allagoa of the Federal High Court, Lagos Judicial Division, sitting at Ikoyi, Lagos, ruled that he would hear the Notice of preliminary objection to the court’s jurisdiction to hear the substantive suit first before
the contempt proceedings for breach of the court orders of status-quo.

But in the appeal filed by the appellants, through their counsel, Babatunde Moshood Fashanu, SAN, he argued that contempt proceedings are extrinsic to the main suit and should be heard first.

Fashanu, SAN, further argued that Justice Lewis-Allagoa erred in law in his decision to hear the notice of preliminary objection to the court’s jurisdiction to hear the substantive suit first before the contempt proceedings for breach of the court orders of status-quo.

According to him, there were pending contempt proceedings against some defendants for allegedly breaching the court’s orders of status-quo in the suit before notice of preliminary objection for court’s jurisdiction by the defendants.

Mr. Fashanu pointed out 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 maintained that the court has a duty to ensure that its orders are obeyed and preserve the dignity of the court.

He stated that the decision was 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.

He, therefore, sought the appeal court to set aside the lower court’s decision and hear the contempt proceedings before jurisdictional challenges.

He prayed the appellate court to grant motions to set aside actions breaching court orders and commit the respondents to prison for contempt.

He equally sought the relief of the court to remit the case to a different judge for hearing on the merits, citing supreme court precedents, in the cases of Ebhodaghe vs. Okoye (2004) 18 NWLR (Part 905) 472 and Bureau of Public Enterprises v. BFI Group (2025) 2 NWLR (Part 1976) 371.
(6).

Responding, counsel to the first defendant, D.J. Fadesere, countered the argument of counsel to the appellants saying the applications challenging the competence of the court on the 29th of May, 2025 takes precedence because if the court lacks jurisdiction the issue of contempt would not arise.

Fadesere urged the court to take both applications of contempt and jurisdiction together and make a decision.

In his own argument, Ademola Adeshina, counsel to 8th to 24th respondents objected to the claim of contempt of court.

He said it was not true that any actions were taken in affront to the authority of the court because his clients were obeying
a consent judgment in another case.

Fashanu SAN then asked the Honourable Judge to step-aside in this case asking for the setting-aside of elections into the Management Council when applications are pending in this case to set the same elections aside.

He asked whether the ordinary man would feel that justice is being done to which the Judge asked him to bring an application for him to recuse himself

The matter is adjourned to 12th of January, 2026 for hearing on the application on the recusal.