Dare Babalola
An Ogun State High Court in Ijebu-Ode has rejected an injunction application filed by Wasiu Ayinde Marshall, popularly known as KWAM 1, preventing Governor Dapo Abiodun and the Fusengbuwa Ruling House from proceeding with the installation of the next Awujale of Ijebuland.
In Suit No: HC3/238/2025, KWAM 1 filed an ex parte motion at the High Court 2 of Ijebu Judicial Division, invoking Order 38 Rules 4 and Order 39 Rule 1 of Ogun State High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules 2024, as well as Section 36 of Nigeria’s 1999 Constitution, seeking to halt the Awujale installation process.
The matter came up on Monday before Hon. Justice A.A. Omoniyi of Court 3.
The applicant was represented by Wahab Shittu SAN.
Shittu told the court that the application, dated December 16, 2025, was backed by a supporting affidavit and filed under specific court rules – Order 38 Rule 3, Order 39 Rule 1, and Section 36 of Nigeria’s Constitution.
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.
