By Bayo Davids
Proceedings in a N152 million property dispute before a Lagos State High Court sitting in Osborne, Ikoyi, were on Monday stalled following the failure of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission to serve its final written address on parties as directed by the court.
Justice Akingbola George subsequently adjourned the matter to April 22, 2026, for the adoption of final written addresses.
The suit, filed by Lagos-based property developer Olukayode Olusanya and his company, Oak Homes Limited, is against a U.S.-based Nigerian engineer, Anthony Ugbebor. It centres on an alleged trespass involving two luxury apartments located at No. 14A Musa Yar’Adua Street, Victoria Island.
At the resumed hearing, counsel to the claimant, Benson Nwosu, told the court that while his client had received and responded to the first defendant’s processes, the EFCC had yet to serve its own address.
Nwosu added that attempts to serve the Commission at its Awolowo Road office in Ikoyi were unsuccessful, as officials at the gate allegedly refused to accept the documents.
Counsel to the EFCC, E.S. Okongbu, confirmed that the Commission had filed its final written address dated March 4, 2026, and apologised for failing to serve the parties in compliance with the court’s order.
Following the development, Justice George directed the anti-graft agency to immediately serve all parties and fixed April 22 for the adoption of addresses.
The adjournment comes against the backdrop of earlier testimony by an EFCC operative, Emmanuel Adide, who told the court that the Commission was never mandated by Ugbebor to recover funds from the claimant.
Adide maintained that the EFCC “is not a debt recovery agency,” explaining that the petition it received alleged criminal breach of trust and obtaining by false pretence, which warranted investigation.
According to him, the Commission later determined that the matter was civil in nature and advised the claimant to retrieve bank drafts earlier submitted.
He further told the court that although discussions on a possible refund took place, there was no agreement to sell the disputed apartments to facilitate repayment, noting that compelling such a transaction would be inappropriate.
The witness also confirmed that Olusanya was initially detained during a visit to the EFCC office in Abuja but was later granted bail. He added that no refund arrangement was reached while the claimant was in custody.
Adide disclosed that the claimant paid a total of N102 million in instalments via bank drafts, though he could not recall the exact number of tranches.
Under cross-examination, he reiterated that there was no written request from Ugbebor asking the Commission to recover funds, stressing that the EFCC’s role was strictly investigative.
The case is now set for final addresses, the last stage before judgment, pending compliance with the court’s directive on service.