Proceedings resumed today before High Court No. 9 of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, presided over by Hon. Justice S. B. Belgore, in a closely watched case in which Mr. Oladejo Lamikanra, SAN, and Woodcoate Properties Limited are seeking to restrain the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) from investigating a petition arising from a disputed property transaction involving AK Culture & Media Ltd, a Nigerian company with Chinese investment interests.

The case stems from allegations made by AK Culture & Media Ltd that it paid approximately ₦156 million to Woodcoate Properties Limited in connection with the lease of a property in Katampe Extension, Abuja, but that possession of the property was never delivered and the money has not been refunded. The company further alleges that, after payment had been completed, an additional ₦63 million was demanded before possession would be handed over. Those allegations are denied by the Claimants, who contend that the dispute is contractual and not criminal.

Following a petition by the company, the EFCC commenced preliminary investigative steps by issuing invitations. Thereafter, the Claimants approached the FCT High Court and obtained interim orders restraining the Commission from continuing aspects of the investigation pending the determination of their Motion on Notice. The enrolled order also restrained the Defendants and persons acting on their instructions from making further petitions or complaints to the EFCC or other law enforcement and regulatory agencies concerning the subject matter pending the hearing of the Motion on Notice.

At today’s proceedings, Mr. Tahiru Adebayo, SAN, appeared for the Claimants/Applicants, while Frank Tietie, Esq., represented the 1st to 4th Defendants/Respondents.

The Court however ruled that the matter could not proceed because the EFCC, the 5th Defendant, had not been served with the hearing notice for the Motion on Notice.

Consequently, Hon. Justice Belgore adjourned the matter to 23 July 2026 to enable proper service on the EFCC and for the Motion on Notice to be heard.

The proceedings have attracted attention within legal and business circles because they raise broader questions concerning the relationship between civil disputes and criminal investigations, the extent to which courts may restrain statutory investigative agencies before investigations are completed, and the balance between protecting individuals from oppressive investigations and preserving the investigative mandate of anti-corruption institutions.

According to the Defendants’ court filings, the dispute extends beyond an ordinary commercial disagreement. They contend that the petition to the EFCC was based on a sequence of alleged events including the receipt of approximately ₦156 million, the alleged refusal to deliver possession of the property, the alleged demand for an additional ₦63 million, the alleged refusal to refund the money, and subsequent events which, in their view, warranted investigation by the Commission. The Claimants, however, maintain that the dispute is purely civil and that the EFCC should not be used as a debt-recovery mechanism.

The case is also being closely monitored because the Defendants argue that the transaction involves a duly incorporated Nigerian company with foreign investment and that the outcome may have implications for investor confidence and the interaction between commercial disputes and criminal investigations.

The Court is expected to hear arguments on 23 July 2026 on whether the interim orders should be continued, varied or discharged, and on the preliminary objections challenging the competence of the proceedings.