Euracare Loses Bid to Stop Chimamanda Adichie’s Son’s Inquest

Justice Aishat Opesanwo of the Lagos State High Court in Ikoyi on Monday dismissed an application by Eurapharma Care Services Nigeria Limited seeking to halt the coroner’s inquest into the circumstances surrounding the death of Nkanu, son of celebrated Nigerian author Chimamanda Adichie.

In her ruling, Justice Opesanwo held that the cremation of the deceased’s body did not, by itself, deprive the coroner of statutory jurisdiction to investigate the circumstances of his death.

The judge also rejected the argument by Eurapharma Care Services Nigeria Limited, operators of Euracare Multi-Specialist Hospital, that the coroner’s decision to receive statements and evidence from medical personnel and other relevant parties in a particular sequence violated its right to a fair hearing.

Read Also: FG Approves Increase in NYSC Corps Members’ Feeding Budget

Consequently, the court upheld the respondents’ preliminary objections and struck out the hospital’s substantive application, clearing the way for the inquest to proceed.

The dispute arose from Nkanu’s death on January 7, 2026, at Euracare Multi-Specialist Hospital in Lagos.

The deceased’s parents, Adichie and her husband, Dr Ivara Esege, alleged that there were prima facie breaches of the duty of care in the treatment of their son.

Euracare has denied the medical negligence allegations, describing them as inaccurate and unfounded.

The death prompted an investigation into the circumstances surrounding his demise, including the events leading up to it and the medical care he received.

Dissatisfied with aspects of the coroner’s proceedings, Euracare approached the court to challenge the coroner’s jurisdiction to continue the inquest, arguing that cremation of the deceased’s body meant a post-mortem examination could no longer be conducted.

The hospital also challenged the coroner’s decision on the order for receiving statements and evidence from medical personnel and other parties connected with the facilities where Nkanu received treatment before his death.

However, Justice Opesanwo held that deciding to conduct an inquest is a matter of unfettered discretion when the circumstances of a death fall within the categories prescribed by law.

Relying on Section 15 of the Coroners System Law of Lagos State, 2007, the judge said the law required an inquest once the specified conditions were met and the death occurred within the relevant coroner’s district.

“The provision gives no room for exercise of discretion in the decision to conduct an inquest once a death results from any one of the nine situations specified, and that it occurs within the area designated as the coroner’s district,” she held.

The judge said the hospital had failed to disprove the circumstances that initially empowered the coroner to commence the inquiry.

She explained that Euracare’s argument focused on the location and availability of the deceased’s body at the time the inquest was to be conducted, rather than on the circumstances surrounding the death that had triggered the coroner’s jurisdiction.

According to her, the law did not require the deceased’s body to remain within the coroner’s district on the date the inquest was held.

Justice Opesanwo also rejected the contention that the cremation would necessarily reduce the proceedings to speculation or render any eventual findings unreliable.

“I am not persuaded by the submission made by the applicant’s counsel that the cremation of the body means the inquest and its conclusion will be predicated on speculation and conjecture,” the judge said.

She noted that the inquest had not yet formally commenced, making the hospital’s concerns about its possible outcome premature.

“What is obvious is that the applicant is concerned with future occurrences, which is the outcome of the inquest,” she added.

The judge stressed that the purpose of a coroner’s inquest was to establish the facts surrounding a death, including the identity of the deceased, as well as when, where and how the person died.

“It is not a trial; no one is on trial in a coroner’s court,” she said.

Justice Opesanwo further held that a coroner’s inquiry was inquisitorial in nature, unlike ordinary adversarial proceedings in which opposing parties present their cases against one another.