Doctor Asks Court To Bar AG’s Firm From Representing Company In Land Dispute

A medical doctor, Ojo Ademola, has urged a Lagos State High Court in Ikeja to stop the law firm of the state’s Attorney General and Commissioner for Justice, Lawal Pedro (SAN), from representing Starmark Finance Company Limited in a land ownership dispute.

Dr Ademola is seeking a court order to compel the law firm to withdraw its representation of the company on the grounds of a conflict of interest in the ongoing lawsuit aimed at stopping alleged land grabbers from encroaching on his property.

The claimant is asking the court to set aside an order issued on February 18, 2025, which granted the change of counsel for the first defendant to Lawal Pedro (SAN) & Associates.

Named as defendants in this suit alongside Starmark Finance are Tunji Solaja and Engineer Peter Omotosho.

Justice Akinkunmi Idowu has already issued an interlocutory injunction restraining the defendants from trespassing, harassing, or conducting any activities on the property located at Plot 1, Block 4, Lekki Peninsula, Scheme 1, Admiralty Road, Eti Osa Local Government Area, Lagos State.

The claimant had told the court that the property measures 1,147.124 square meters, as indicated in a Deed of Assignment registered as No. 69, page 69, in Volume 2741 at the Land Registry in Ikeja, Lagos State.

The judge had also prohibited the defendants from using force, thugs, police, or other government agencies to intimidate or illegally enter the claimant’s property in Lekki Peninsula.

In his Motion on Notice, Ademola argues that the Attorney General’s office had previously issued a Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) advice against the party that Lawal Pedro (SAN) & Associates now seeks to represent.

He contends that the first defendant, represented by Lawal Pedro and Associates, failed to disclose that the Attorney General is the principal partner and founder of the firm, which has issued criminal indictments against the company and certain individuals, recommending prosecution.

The claimant further questions the Attorney General’s chambers’ legitimacy in defending those he and his office have officially indicted of criminal offences.