Overview
In a definitive judgment that reinforces the foundational principles of jurisdictional authority in Nigerian law, the Supreme Court of Nigeria on January 30, 2026, brought finality to a complex 29-year legal battle, nullifying a N1.4 billion award against Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited (now Seplat Energy Producing Nigeria Unlimited). The apex court’s decision resolves the long-running matter and reaffirms established legal principles governing jurisdiction. KENNA acted as Counsel to Mobil in the proceedings, with representation led by Ituah Imhanze, FCArb. The dispute originated in 1997 with a suit filed by His Royal Highness, Obong David Edu, and 132 others, seeking compensation for the alleged compulsory acquisition of community land in Akwa Ibom State.
The case was initially heard in the Federal High Court, Uyo, which, in 2014, ruled in favour of the claimants, awarding approximately N379.9 million, accruing interest. Mobil, represented by Ituah Imhanze of KENNA, appealed this decision. In a pivotal 2018 ruling, the Court of Appeal, Calabar Division, allowed the appeal and set aside the Federal High Court’s judgment on the critical ground that the court lacked jurisdiction to adjudicate such land compensation claims. Undeterred, the claimants appealed to the Supreme Court. In a unanimous judgment delivered on January 30, 2026, a five-man panel of the apex court firmly dismissed the appeal, upholding the submissions advanced by Mobil’s counsel, Ituah Imhanze, Esq. of KENNA.
The Supreme Court’s ruling provides clarity on a settled point of law: matters relating to compensation for compulsorily acquired land and unexhausted improvements fall exclusively within the jurisdiction of State High Courts, as prescribed by the Land Use Act. The Federal High Court, therefore, lacked the requisite authority to entertain the suit from its inception. This judgment not only nullifies the original N1.4 billion award but also reaffirms a critical legal doctrine, ensuring that similar disputes are channeled through the appropriate judicial framework, thereby promoting legal certainty and procedural order.
