Follow Us on Google
Justice Olalekan A. Oresanya of the Lagos State High Court has ordered all parties in the dispute over the Oloja of Lagos chieftaincy stool to maintain the status quo pending the determination of the substantive suit.
The order followed the dismissal of a preliminary objection filed by one of the defendants, Prince Babajide Rafiu Kosoko, who had challenged the jurisdiction of the court to entertain the suit. The objection was supported by the first defendant, the Oba of Lagos, Oba Rilwan Akiolu.
The suit was instituted by Prince Surajudeen Abiodun Olojo-Kosoko, Head of the Akinsanya Olojo Ruling House; Prince Theophilus Olojo-Kosoko, General Secretary of the ruling house; and Prince Abiola Kosoko. They sued for themselves and on behalf of the Akinsanya Olojo-Kosoko Ruling House.
The defendants are the Oba of Lagos, Oba Rilwan Akiolu; the Lagos State Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice; the Commissioner for Local Government, Chieftaincy Affairs and Rural Development; the Executive Chairman of Lagos Island Local Government; Prince Babajide Rafiu Kosoko; Mr. Muritala Olanrewaju Kosoko; and Mr. Tunji Taiwo Kosoko.
Through their counsel, Olusegun Fabunmi (SAN), the claimants are challenging what they described as attempts to replace Prince Abiola Kosoko, whom they maintain is the duly nominated candidate of the Akinsanya Olojo Ruling House for the Oloja of Lagos stool.
In the preliminary objection, counsel to the fifth defendant, Dayo Oshodi (SAN), argued that the dispute bordered on the nomination, selection and installation of a traditional ruler, matters governed by customary law and the Lagos State Obas and Chiefs Law. He contended that such issues were outside the jurisdiction of the court and urged the judge to dismiss the suit.
The claimants, however, maintained that the dispute was not about the nomination process, which they argued had been concluded in 2020 with the emergence of the third claimant as the ruling house’s candidate.
They contended that the real dispute arose following a land-related disagreement, alleging that some of the defendants had disregarded the earlier nomination and were processing the candidacy of other princes.
In his ruling, Justice Oresanya held that the claimants’ statement of claim disclosed a reasonable cause of action capable of judicial determination.
Other News
The judge ruled that the issues raised could not be resolved at the interlocutory stage and would require a full trial.
He further held that where issues raised in a preliminary objection require evidence to be led, such objections cease to be pure jurisdictional issues and become matters for determination during the substantive hearing.
“I find no merit in the preliminary objection filed by the fifth defendant. The objection is overruled and the application is accordingly dismissed,” Justice Oresanya held.
On the claimants’ application for an interlocutory injunction restraining the defendants from recommending, selecting, nominating, appointing or installing any other person as Oloja of Lagos pending the determination of the suit, the court declined to grant the relief.
Justice Oresanya held that granting the injunction would effectively determine issues already raised in the substantive suit, thereby prejudicing the defendants before the commencement of trial.
Instead, the court directed all parties to maintain the status quo ante bellum—the state of affairs existing before the events that culminated in the purported nomination of the fifth and sixth defendants.
Consequently, Prince Abiola Olojo-Kosoko remains the Oloja-elect pending the determination of the substantive suit.
The court also ordered an accelerated hearing of the case to ensure its expeditious determination.
The matter was subsequently adjourned until October 6, 2026, for the hearing of the substantive suit.
