The Oyo State High Court has adjourned the legal battle between Egbe Amofin Oodua and the Registered Trustees of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) sine die (indefinitely), following the entry of an appeal at the Court of Appeal against the interim order of injunction made in favour of the Plaintiff in the suit.
At the resumed hearing on Monday, April 27, 2026, the courtroom was packed full with senior members of the Inner Bar, as well as those of the outer Bar. Chief Yomi Aliu, SAN, led the legal team for the Claimant, comprising of Mutalubi Ojo Adebayo, SAN, Tunji Ogunrinde, SAN and others, while the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 6th Defendants were represented by a battery of Senior Advocates and other juniors, notably, Sammie Somiari, SAN, Chief A. A. Malik, SAN and Dr. Liborous Oshoma, Esq.
The session began with a push by the Claimant to move an application for an interlocutory injunction. However, proceedings were immediately complicated by a pending joinder application filed by Lateef Omoyemi Akangbe, SAN and complaints from the 2nd Defendant’s Counsel regarding the non-service of originating processes on his client and the fact that the application for joinder was just served on him.
The 1st Defendant’s counsel (Liborous Oshoma) further questioned the priority of the application for injunction, arguing that a preliminary objection challenging the court’s jurisdiction for which the claimant had joined issues remained pending.
The tide turned when Chief A. A. Malik, SAN, appearing for the 6th Defendant, prayed the court to stay proceedings in the matter. In a lighthearted but firm reference to the Latin term sine die, the learned Silk suggested that the court applies the break “until sinners die,” noting further that “the wages of sin is death”.
He informed the court that an appeal against the court’s earlier interim order had already been officially entered at the Court of Appeal as Appeal No. CA/IB/176/2026. He argued that for the High Court to continue would risk a “collision course” with a superior court, as jurisdiction now effectively rests with the appellate level.
The spirited efforts by the Claimant’s senior counsel to keep the matter active at the Ibadan court, and his insistence on the issuance of a preservative order by the court, on the grounds that records of appeal and affidavit of fact were not yet formally before the court, suffered a severe setback and took a deserved hit, when like magic, A.A Malik, SAN, learned senior counsel to the 6th Defendant, promptly produced and tendered accross the Bar, a copy of the record of appeal, a motion for stay of execution/proceedings filed at the Court of Appeal as well as an affidavit of facts.
Counsel for the 1st, 2nd and 3rd Defendants supported the stay argument, asserting that the Court of Appeal is now the proper venue to seek any preservative orders regarding the res (the subject matter of the suit). Specifically Sammie Somiari SAN informed the court that the appellate court is cloaked with jurisdiction to preserve the res in any matter before it.
In a well-considered ruling, the learned presiding judge elected to “wash his hands” of the proceedings to avoid jurisdictional conflict. The suit was subsequently adjourned indefinitely, pending the outcome of the appeal.
This development marks a significant moment in the NBA’s leadership selection history. While legal observers have expressed concern over lawyers using litigation to stall their own association’s democratic processes, the ruling provides a tactical “breather” for all stakeholders in the affairs of the NBA and, in particular, the Electoral Committee of the NBA (ECNBA).
