“Plaintiff Has Discontinued The Suit” — Court Dismisses Case Seeking To Block FCT High Court Director Ubani’s Appointment As Judge

The Federal High Court sitting in Abuja has dismissed a suit seeking to restrain the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) Judicial Service Committee and the National Judicial Council (NJC) from considering Chukwuemeka Tony Ubani, Director of Enforcement at the FCT High Court, for appointment as a judge.

Justice Inyang Ekwo dismissed the suit on Thursday, October 29, 2026, following the filing of a notice of discontinuance by the plaintiff, Bizplus Consulting Services Limited.

The suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/2174/2026, sought to prevent the FCT Judicial Service Committee and the NJC from screening, shortlisting, evaluating or recommending Ubani for judicial appointment pending the determination of allegations concerning his handling of the enforcement of a judgment debt against the Benue State Government.

At the resumed proceedings, counsel to the defendants, Akinlolu Kehinde, SAN, informed the court that the plaintiff had filed a notice of discontinuance.

Kehinde urged the court to dismiss the suit with costs, arguing that the parties had already joined issues in the matter before the plaintiff sought to discontinue the proceedings.

In his ruling, Justice Ekwo held that the notice of discontinuance was deemed and consequently dismissed the suit.

The legal dispute arose from allegations made by Bizplus concerning Ubani’s role in an attempt to enforce a judgment debt against the Benue State Government through funds held by United Bank for Africa (UBA) Plc.

According to an affidavit filed in support of its application, Bizplus stated that it was a judgment creditor in a separate case involving the Benue State Government.

The company explained that the FCT High Court had, on December 4, 2025, issued a garnishee order absolute in its favour as part of efforts to recover the judgment debt.

A garnishee order absolute is a court directive requiring a third party, usually a bank holding funds belonging to a judgment debtor, to pay the specified amount to the judgment creditor in satisfaction of a judgment.

Bizplus alleged that following the issuance of the order, Ubani, in his capacity as Director of Enforcement at the FCT High Court, wrote a letter dated May 4, 2026, requesting police assistance to facilitate the execution of the judgment.

The company maintained that the request formed part of the administrative steps taken towards enforcing the garnishee order against funds allegedly belonging to the Benue State Government and held by UBA.

However, the enforcement process subsequently became controversial after the bank objected to the proposed execution.

According to Bizplus, the enforcement operation was suspended on September 4, 2026, following an objection raised by UBA.

The bank was said to have relied on its interpretation of an order of the Court of Appeal directing the parties to maintain the status quo.

The plaintiff alleged that despite Ubani’s earlier written request for police assistance, he subsequently denied authorising the enforcement operation.

Bizplus considered the alleged contradiction sufficiently serious to warrant investigation by the relevant judicial authorities.

The company consequently submitted petitions to the FCT Judicial Service Committee and the NJC, requesting an investigation into Ubani’s conduct in connection with the enforcement proceedings.

It maintained that the allegations should be examined before the authorities proceeded with any consideration of Ubani for appointment to the Bench.

The company subsequently approached the Federal High Court, seeking judicial intervention to prevent the appointment process from proceeding while the issues raised in its petitions remained unresolved.

In its originating processes, Bizplus asked the court to restrain the FCT Judicial Service Committee and the NJC from screening, shortlisting, evaluating or recommending Ubani for appointment as a judge pending the determination of the suit.

It also sought orders suspending steps already taken towards his proposed judicial appointment.

The company argued that the allegations concerning the enforcement of the judgment debt raised questions that required investigation before Ubani could be considered for judicial office.

However, Ubani challenged the competence of the suit through a preliminary objection.

He argued that Bizplus lacked the requisite legal standing, otherwise known as locus standi, to institute proceedings seeking to interfere with the judicial appointment process.

According to his objection, the company had failed to establish any personal injury, enforceable legal right or sufficient interest that would entitle it to challenge his consideration for appointment as a judge.

Ubani maintained that the plaintiff’s status as a judgment creditor in a separate proceeding did not automatically confer on it the legal right to interfere with the statutory functions of the bodies responsible for judicial appointments.

He further argued that any administrative petition submitted against him was a matter for the appropriate authorities to investigate and determine in accordance with their powers.

The objection therefore challenged the legal basis upon which Bizplus sought to invoke the jurisdiction of the Federal High Court to halt the appointment process.

The other defendants in the suit were the FCT Judicial Service Committee, the National Judicial Council and the Attorney-General of the Federation.

Before the court could determine the substantive allegations and the preliminary objection, however, Bizplus filed a notice of discontinuance, indicating its decision not to proceed with the action.

At Thursday’s proceedings, Kehinde drew the court’s attention to the notice and requested that the suit be dismissed rather than merely struck out.

He argued that issues had already been joined between the parties, making dismissal the appropriate order.

Justice Ekwo accepted the position that the notice of discontinuance was deemed and dismissed the suit.

The dismissal brings the proceedings before the Federal High Court to an end without a judicial determination of the allegations made by Bizplus against Ubani.

The ruling also does not amount to a finding that the allegations were established or that Ubani committed any misconduct.

Similarly, the court’s decision did not determine the merits of the underlying judgment debt dispute involving Bizplus, the Benue State Government and UBA.

Rather, the proceedings concerned the plaintiff’s attempt to obtain judicial orders preventing the relevant authorities from considering Ubani for appointment to the FCT High Court Bench.

With the suit dismissed, the particular court action seeking to halt his consideration for judicial appointment is no longer pending before the Federal High Court.

Post Title: “Plaintiff Has Discontinued The Suit” — Court Dismisses Case Seeking To Block FCT High Court Director Ubani’s Appointment As Judge By Papers Nigeria.