Levitikal vs Maryam Abacha: Why fair hearing matters in Nigeria’s property sector — Activist
Media Activist Calls for Fair Hearing in Ongoing Property Dispute
In a statement made this week, media professional and activist David Abakpa has urged for a fair hearing in the ongoing legal dispute between Levitikal Realties & Construction Limited and Maryam Sani Abacha. The conflict centers around a property located at 68 Molade Okoya Thomas Street in Victoria Island, Lagos.
Abakpa articulated that the case brings to light critical issues regarding property rights, commercial investments, and each party’s right to a fair hearing. He emphasized that while the court’s interim order must be respected, it is essential to recognize that such an order does not represent a final resolution to the underlying issues of the dispute.
“This legal matter extends beyond a simple disagreement over land ownership; it involves contractual agreements, financial obligations, and the complexities of redevelopment,” Abakpa stated.
According to Abakpa, the dispute stems from an initial Property Development Joint Venture Agreement, which was later superseded by a power of attorney granted to Levitikal. He highlighted the necessity of examining the terms and legal implications of this power of attorney to ascertain the rights and responsibilities of the involved parties.
The developer has reportedly faced several challenges, including obtaining vacant possession from existing tenants, settling outstanding property taxes owed to the Lagos State Government, and addressing demolition and excavation costs. Abakpa noted that the property is not simply an untouched site, but rather one with tenants who have resided there for an extended period, complicating redevelopment efforts.
The economic implications of recent changes to fuel subsidies in 2023 were also raised by Abakpa, who suggested that the removal of the subsidy has led to increased costs of construction materials, transportation, and labor, placing additional strain on ongoing projects.
He also mentioned that, in response to the challenges faced, Levitikal sought government approval for additional construction, which included plans for two- and three-bedroom flats. Abakpa stated that this development is significant as it aims to alleviate the financial burdens associated with the initial project and facilitate the completion of the original nine units.
In terms of financial stakes in the development, Abakpa claimed the land was valued at approximately ₦400 million at the time of the agreement, a figure that represented the landowners’ contribution. Levitikal’s investment in the project is reported to exceed ₦17 billion, while the landowners could see a potential return of around ₦9 billion upon completion.
“These valuations are critical, yet they must be evaluated alongside contractual terms, financial documentation, construction costs, and valuation reports,” he added.
Abakpa raised additional concerns regarding the construction of the new flats, claiming that members of the Abacha family visited the site to monitor progress. He argued that the timing and nature of these visits could be relevant to understanding the development’s timeline and any potential objections.
He urged that all relevant documents and evidence should be examined to resolve the issues at hand. “Questions surrounding this dispute should not be settled through public speculation but through documented evidence presented before the court,” he stated.
Abakpa also drew attention to the interests of subscribers who have made payments for the development units. He expressed that a prolonged legal dispute could significantly impact these individuals who are anticipating ownership of properties.
Regarding the proceedings, Abakpa confirmed that the Federal High Court had issued an ex parte order appointing a receiver/manager for the project. He noted that such an order must be honored while both parties pursue their legal remedies.
“An ex parte order does not invalidate the affected party’s rights but remains binding unless appropriately overturned,” he specified.
He reiterated that the allegations against the developer, the received approvals, and the project’s completion should be thoroughly scrutinized, alongside a detailed examination of the entire history between the parties.
Abakpa concluded by stating that both Levitikal and Maryam Abacha are entitled to present their respective cases in accordance with the law. He emphasized the importance of a fair hearing for both parties to ensure that the legal process is just and equitable. “Fairness requires that both sides are fully heard; both Levitikal and Maryam Abacha deserve the opportunity to have their claims adjudicated fairly,” he said.
