The Legal Practitioner and Disciplinary Committee (LPDC) has turned down a request to dismiss a petition against Ikechukwu Ezechukwu (SAN), Barr. Smart Ukpanah and Barr. Hope Onyekwere, over alleged misconduct.
In the petition before the LPDC, the lawyers were accused of professional misconduct, criminal misrepresentation, forgery and perjury.
During the sitting of the committee, chaired by Mr Kalu Umeh (SAN), counsel to Ezechukwu, Barrister D. O. Okolo, prayed the panel to dismiss the petition on the ground that the petitioner Kingsley Aneubuna, had decided to withdraw the petition.
He said the petitioner was aware of the proceedings but failed to appear.
According to him, the petitioner forwarded a letter to the committee notifying it of his intention to withdraw the petition.
He therefore urged the committee to dismiss the petition, particularly because the petitioner failed to appear.
He said, “The petitioner forwarded a letter notifying the committee of the intention to withdraw the petition. The petitioner is very much aware of the proceedings but is not before the panel.”
The panel’s chairman, in his response, turned down the request, saying that the panel does not allow the withdrawal of petitions already before it.
According to him, once issues have been joined, petitions cannot be withdrawn.
“Since issues have been joined, we are obligated by the rules of this committee to adopt the processes filed by the petitioner,” the chairman said.
The case was further adjourned to July 29, 2026, for a definite hearing.
The petition arose from a disputed property between Ngozika Nwaneri and Uche Okoli and his company, Multi Shelters Limited, which are the claimants in (Suit No. FCT/HC/CV/1182/2018) between Uche Okoli & Ors V EFCC & Ors.
The subject matter of the suit is a dispute over Plot No. 713, Cadastral Zone B14, Dutse District, Abuja, where the SAN’s (1st Respondent) clients, Uche Okoli/Multi Shelters Ltd and one Dr Ngozika Nwaneri, lay claim to title to the land.
The petitioner was offered a terrace duplex on the disputed land in 2018 by Mr Uche Okoli and Multi Shelters Ltd, clients of the SAN, for the sum of N51,000,000.
Before making payment, the petitioner and her lawyer enquired with the Senior Advocate about the status of the property and were assured that it had a clean title and was unencumbered.
Consequent upon the assurances of the Senior Advocate, the petitioner accepted the offer of the property and made the necessary payment and the parties signed the agreement for the transaction.
The duration of the house’s construction was fixed for two years, during which the petitioner was expected to complete all payments.
The petitioner later noticed the slow pace of work on the property and demanded an explanation, but was assured that the property would still be delivered within the agreed timeline.
In 2021, the petitioner discovered that litigation over the property was pending in Suit No. FCT/HC/CV/1182/2018, which was filed by the senior advocate (1st respondent) in March 2018, where the court, headed by Hon Justice Hussein Baba Yusuf (the Chief Judge of the FCT High Court), granted an injunction in 2018.
The petitioner also discovered that she had been joined in the suit as a Co-Claimant, without her knowledge or consent, by one Barr Smart Ukpanah (the 2nd Respondent), who filed court processes and represented her and other subscribers in court without any authorisation, and that one Barr Hope C. Onyekwere testified in court on behalf of the petitioner and others without their knowledge or authorisation.
It was also alleged that the senior advocate brought a forged version of the agreement his clients had with the petitioner to court, bearing a forged signature and backdated to 2012, rather than 2018, when the genuine agreement was executed.
The petitioner further alleged that both the forged and genuine agreements were prepared by the 1st respondent. who was aware that there was a pending litigation over the property in 2018 when it was sold to the petitioner and that it was based on the fraudulent misrepresentation by the 1st respondent and his clients that the petitioner paid money for the property.
The petitioner later engaged a lawyer to approach the court and have the petitioner’s name struck out of the suit, and thereafter filed a petition against the respondents before the LPDC in petition No. BB/LPDC/760/2022.
The petitioner, therefore, prayed the LPDC to investigate the respondents, who are all legal practitioners called to the Nigerian Bar, for misconduct.
