Awujale: Court rejects Wasiu Ayinde’s application to stop process

Fixes Jan 14 for hearing

AN Ogun State High Court sitting in Ijebu-Ode has rejected an application filed by Fuji artiste Wasiu Ayinde Marshall (KWAM 1), seeking an order of interim injunction restraining Governor Dapo Abiodun, Fusengbuwa Ruling House and four others from taking further steps in the installation process of the next Awujale of Ijebuland.

Ayinde had in an ex parte motion filed in the High Court 2 of Ijebu Judicial Division in Suit No: HC3/238/2025, said the motion was brought pursuant to Order 38 Rules 4 and Order 39 Rule 1 of the High Court of Ogun State (Civil Procedure) Rules 2024, Section 36 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) and under the inherent jurisdiction of the court.

The matter came up on Monday before Hon. Justice A.A. Omoniyi of Court 3.

The applicant was represented by Wahab Shittu SAN.

Shittu informed the court that the application filed before it, dated 16th December, 2025, was supported by a paragraph affidavit and was brought under Order 38 Rule 3 and Order 39 Rule 1, as well as Section 36 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

He prayed the court to grant the application and order an accelerated hearing of the originating summons. Shittu told the court that only the applicant can be heard since the application is a motion exparte.

Justice Omoniyi referred the learned counsel to Order 39 Rule 2 of the Rules which states that all applications must be made on notice and that no application shall be made ex parte unless supported by a motion on notice.

The court asked the application’s counsel if the application is not defective.

The court stated that motions for injunction are not substantive and that principle would be violated if the Originating Summons is taken as the motion on notice.

Dr. Shittu said they rushed to the court because they believed that the applicant’s fundamental right was being threatened.

Justice Omoniyi, in his ruling, said the court does not think an interim order can be granted pending the determination of the substantive suit, relying on Seven Up v. Abiola and City Express v. LASG.

The court relies on Supreme Court precedent that interim applications must be filed alongside motions on notice.

The court noted that the applicant had not filed a motion on notice and referred to Order 39 Rule 2, which states that the court must not grant order ex parte unless there’s a motion for injunction.

He said, “Where a procedure is laid down for making an order, that’s the only way to get the order. It is fatal to an application for an interim order to not file a motion on notice.

“Additionally, there’s no undertaking as to damages, which, in a plethora of cases, has been held to be absolutely vital. The application fails and is refused.”

The judge then adjourned the matter till January 14, 2026, for hearing.

READ ALSO: Pastor Tinubu, Queen Michal and Awujale Omogbolahan, Ganusi I