A fresh twist has emerged in the enforcement battle over a ₦19.4 billion arbitral award in favour of Hanson Dredging & Marine Services Ltd., as the respondent in the case, SANEF Creatives Ltd., has appealed against the enforcement proceeding and further petitioned the Chief Judge of Lagos State over the hearing of the matter.
The move, which Hanson describes as a calculated ploy to frustrate justice, comes amid accusations of forum shopping and abuse of court process in the high-stakes legal fight arising from a terminated dredging and reclamation contract at the National Theatre, Lagos.
The brewing legal tussle stems from Hanson Dredging’s dispute with SANEF-a firm owned by the Bankers’ Committee of the Central Bank of Nigeria, CBN, over the unlawful termination of the dredging and reclamation contract.
The contract, signed in November 2021, was derailed in May 2022 when SANEF insisted the 36-week timeline had expired, disregarding delays caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and bureaucratic hurdles.
Thereafter, Hanson Dredging represented by Dr. Charles Mekwunye, SAN, initiated arbitration in 2023 and also alleged that the CBN, under former Governor Godwin Emefiele, unlawfully debited ₦4.2 billion in advance payments from their account.
In a judgment delivered on December 30, 2024, Sole Arbitrator Ayo Fanimokun held that SANEF had violated the contract terms by terminating the agreement despite Hanson having completed over 60% of the work.
Following the final arbitration proceedings that awarded Hanson Dredging a judgment of ₦19.4 billion, the company sought to enforce the award through Suit No. LD/6707GCM/2023 which was recently transferred to Justice O. A. Sunmonu of the Lagos State High Court by the Chief Judge of Lagos State from Justice Olukolu.
However, SANEF through its counsel Paul Usoro & Co., filed two additional suits on the same subject matter: Suit No. LD/8056GCM/2024 and Suit No. LD/9221GCM/2025, with the latter currently before Justice Olukolu.
The law firm then petitioned the Chief Judge of Lagos State, Justice Kazeem Alogba, seeking to transfer the enforcement suit from Justice Sunmonu and consolidate all three suits before Justice Olukolu. J
The firm has also written other petitions to the Chief Judge on the matter with one dated 26 May 2025, accusing Justice Sunmonu of judicial bias and procedural overreach.
It claimed that the judge showed “unrestrained ambition” to hear all related matters despite a pending application for consolidation.
In the petition, SANEF’s lawyer and former Nigerian Bar Association, NBA, President, Mr Paul Usoro, SAN, argued that Justice Sunmonu acted outside the bounds of Order 41 Rule 7(2) of the Lagos High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2019, which reserves consolidation authority to the Chief Judge.
His petition further alleged that Justice Sunmonu insisted the related matter before Justice Olukolu be transferred to his court.
It prayed the Chief Judge to reassign all suits relating to the matter to either Justice Olukolu or to another judge, excluding Justice Sunmonu, citing the risk of a miscarriage of justice.
However, in response to the petition, Hanson Dredging, through its lead counsel, Dr. Charles Mekwunye, SAN, rejected the claims as misleading, abusive, and a dangerous attempt to browbeat the judiciary.
Dr. Mekwunye, described the petition dated May 26, 2025 as “unprofessional and scandalous,” noting that no judge should be subjected to such public humiliation for performing their judicial duties.
Mekwunye pointed out that the petition was personally defended in open court by Paul Usoro SAN on 27 May 2025, an act he claimed was aimed at arm-twisting the judiciary.
He also cited derogatory language used in the petition; phrases such as “naked ambition” and “judicial tyranny” as clear signs of disrespect not just to Justice Sunmonu but to the entire Lagos judiciary.
Dr. Mekwunye also raised concerns over what he termed “abuse of court process” through the filing of three separate suits over the same transaction and attempt to use the exalted office of the chief judge to circumvent the enforcement proceedings.
He alleged. that while SANEF seeks consolidation, its intent appears less about judicial efficiency and more about forum shopping—shopping for a more sympathetic court.
Dr. Mekwunye insisted that consolidation cannot be forced unilaterally and cited appellate precedents, such as Emperion v. Aflon and Ngere v. Okuruket, which holds that consolidation requires consent of both parties and that it should never be granted where it risks procedural confusion or injustice.
He also faulted Mr Usoro’s representation of the court’s 17 April, 2025 proceedings, arguing that the ruling merely permitted SANEF to file a response to Hanson’s application to enforce the arbitral award.
According to Mekwunye, the April 17, 2025 hearing before Justice Sunmonu was scheduled for two motions: Hanson Dredging’s application to enforce its Arbitral Award and SANEF’s preliminary objection.
He alleged that Usoro informed the court that a new suit had been filed to set aside the award and requested an adjournment pending the Chief Judge’s response to his petitions.
Mekwunye stated that he opposed the move, describing the new suit as a gross abuse of court process and arguing that a letter to the Chief Judge does not operate as a stay of proceedings or justify delaying a valid enforcement motion.
He claimed that Usoro subsequently filed a flurry of applications and petitions—one of which even alleged tampering with court records, a serious charge which he noted should be pursued separately and not used to derail ongoing proceedings.
Mekwunye also accused the SANEF’s lawyer of a calculated attempt to manipulate the court assignment system, by seeking to dictate that all suits be heard by Justice Olukolu.
According to Mekwunye in his response letter, “No litigant has the right to choose which judge hears their case. The rules are clear: judicial assignment is the exclusive prerogative of the Chief Judge, and any attempt to influence that process is an attack on the judiciary itself.”
Urging the Chief Judge to ignore SANEF’s petition, Mekwunye said: “We therefore appeal to his Lordship not to lend the weight of your exalted office to a law firm which is behaving as a law unto itself, grossly abusing the process of the court by filing several suits in respect of the said matter, nominating the particular judge to hear these various suits along the way insulting and humiliating judges and denigrating the judiciary under your watch.”
(Independent.ng)
