Lagos Country Club Crisis: Fashanu Cites Conflicting Court Orders as Judge Recuses Self

LAGOS – A judge of the Federal High Court, Lagos, Justice A. Lewis-Allagoa, has recused himself from a suit instituted by Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Babatunde Fashanu, over the lingering crisis rocking the Lagos Country Club, Ikeja.

The judge withdrew from the case, Suit No. FHC/LAG/CS/876/2026, on Thursday, October 29, 2026, at the new Federal High Court Complex on Bourdillon Road, Ikoyi, Lagos, paving the way for the matter to be reassigned to another judge.

The suit, titled B.A.M. Fashanu, SAN v. Incorporated Trustees of Lagos Country Club & Ors., is among several legal disputes arising from the protracted crisis within the prestigious family and sports club.

Fashanu had, in a Motion on Notice dated June 1, 2026, urged the court to transfer the case to another judge, citing an alleged likelihood of bias arising from what he described as conflicting orders issued by Justice Lewis-Allagoa in two earlier cases involving the club.

In outlining his grounds for seeking the judge’s withdrawal, the plaintiff referred to Suit No. FHC/L/CS/1792/2024, instituted by him against the Registered Trustees of Lagos Country Club and others, seeking to set aside an earlier Consent Judgment in Suit No. FHC/L/CS/321/2024 over alleged breaches of fundamental rights and denial of fair hearing.

According to the plaintiff, the court had issued three separate orders directing parties to maintain the status quo in the 1792 case, dated October 22, 2024, November 6, 2024, and January 23, 2025.

He alleged that, notwithstanding the orders, the first, eighth to twentieth, and twenty-second to twenty-fourth defendants, alongside their servants and privies, undertook several actions in alleged violation of the directives, including conducting elections into the Management Committee (MC), which resulted in the emergence of the twenty-second defendant as president for a one-year term.

The plaintiff further contended that, while the 1792 case was still pending, the first defendant and some other defendants filed Terms of Settlement dated July 8, 2025, and subsequently obtained a Consent Judgment on July 16, 2025, in Suit No. FHC/L/CS/1886/2024.

Fashanu argued that he was not a party to the 1886 case, yet the Consent Judgment declared valid and lawful all actions taken pursuant to the earlier Consent Judgment in the 321 case.

He maintained that the development effectively pre-empted the determination of his pending suit in the 1792 case, which seeks, among other reliefs, to nullify the original Consent Judgment in the 321 case.

The plaintiff also alleged that the three status quo orders made in the 1792 case were inconsistent with the subsequent Consent Judgment in the 1886 case, particularly as the latter appeared to validate actions he claimed had been undertaken in breach of the earlier court directives.

Another major ground raised by Fashanu was that the Incorporated Trustees, being the legal representatives of the club’s members, including himself, had allowed proceedings in the 1886 case to produce decisions that allegedly undermined the subsisting orders in his earlier suit without affording him an opportunity to be heard.

He consequently argued that Justice Lewis-Allagoa, having made the earlier orders and subsequently presided over proceedings that produced the disputed Consent Judgment, should not continue to hear the present suit seeking to set it aside.

According to the plaintiff, the judge had expressed views on the subject matter of the dispute in a manner that could suggest that the issues had already been pre-judged, thereby creating what he described as a real likelihood of bias.
Although the motion seeking his recusal was scheduled for hearing on Thursday, October 29, Justice Lewis-Allagoa reportedly opted to withdraw from the case rather than proceed with arguments on the application.
The judge reportedly stated that he would recuse himself because the plaintiff lacked confidence in his ability to hear the matter and subsequently directed that the case be sent for reassignment to another judge.

The substantive suit seeks to set aside the Consent Judgment delivered in Suit No. FHC/L/CS/1886/2024, alongside actions allegedly taken pursuant to it, including the conduct of elections within the club.

The case is expected to be reassigned to another judge of the Federal High Court, who will determine the issues raised by the parties.

The judge’s decision to recuse himself does not amount to a determination of the allegations raised by the plaintiff or the substantive reliefs being sought in the suit.