The Federal High Court in Abuja has on Thursday 29 Oct 2026, dismissed a suit seeking to stop the Judicial Service Committee of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) and the National Judicial Council (NJC) from considering the Director of Enforcement of the FCT High Court, Chukwuemeka Tony Ubani, for appointment as a judge.
Justice Inyang Ekwo dismissed the suit on Thursday after counsel to the defendants, A.T. Kehinde, SAN, informed the court that the plaintiff, Bizplus Consulting Services Ltd, had filed a notice of discontinuance.
Kehinde, who announced appearance for all the defendants in suit, told the court that issues had been joined in the matter before urging the judge to dismiss the suit with costs.
In his ruling, Justice Ekwo held that the notice of discontinuance was deemed and proceeded to dismiss the suit.
The suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/2174/2026, arose from allegations by Bizplus concerning Ubani’s handling of an attempt to enforce a judgment debt against the Benue State Government through funds held by United Bank for Africa (UBA) Plc.
The company had approached the court seeking an order restraining 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 substantive suit.
It also sought the suspension of any steps already taken in the selection process, arguing that the allegations arising from the enforcement dispute should be investigated before the appointment process proceeded.
In an affidavit supporting its application, Bizplus, through its authorised representative, Dr Maurice Ibe, said it was a judgment creditor in suit No. FCT/HC/CV/3693/2025, involving the company and another party against the Benue State Government and another defendant.
The company stated that the FCT High Court issued a garnishee order absolute in the case on December 4, 2025.
Bizplus alleged that Ubani, acting in his capacity as Director of Enforcement, wrote an official letter dated May 4, 2026, requesting police assistance to execute the judgment.
According to the company, the letter was issued in line with the court’s internal administrative procedure, which it said required written clearance from the Chief Judge before the Director of Enforcement could activate law enforcement assistance.
The company further alleged that police tactical officers attached to the Intelligence Response Team accompanied its representatives to UBA on September 4, 2026, to execute the court order.
The Court subsequently halted its internal enforcement processes after adverse applications were served on it. Notwithstanding this, Bizplus proceeded with an attempt to enforce the judgment with the assistance of armed police officers.
The company consequently approached the Federal High Court to prevent the selection process from proceeding while the issues it raised remained outstanding.
In response, Ubani filed a preliminary objection challenging Bizplus’s legal standing to institute the action.
In an affidavit supporting the objection, he argued that the company had not established any legal right, personal injury or sufficient interest that entitled it to interfere with the judicial appointment process.
He also maintained that any administrative petition against him was a matter for the relevant authorities to investigate and determine.
Ubani further contended that the suit was premature and failed to disclose a reasonable cause of action against him and the other defendants.
The other defendants were the FCT Judicial Service Committee, the NJC and the Attorney-General of the Federation.