Continental Pharmaceuticals Nigeria Limited hereby issues a rejoinder to refute allegations made in an FIJ online publication titled “Lagos CP Jimoh Illegally Detains Lawyers Who Got Multibillion-Naira Property Eviction Judgement Against Albert Awofisayo’s Company.”
This rejoinder seeks to clarify events surrounding the disputed property located at 381 Agege Motor Road, Lagos, and addresses six key issues:
- Arrest of Lawyers and Alleged Buyer
- Background: Following a Court judgement delivered on 20th December 2024, granting possession of the property known as 381, Agege Motor Road, Lagos (“the property”), to the Claimants, the Claimants’ lawyers (Messrs. Adekunle Lawal & Oyewole Rahmon) and the purported buyer of the property(Alhaji Kazeem Olajide Alabi) were arrested after being caught red-handed, vandalizing and stealing the company’s assets, including heavy duty generating plants, industrial machines, air conditioners, water production machines, and other valuables belonging to the company worth over N1 Billion, by officers and men of the Nigeria Police Force.
- Date of Incident: The incident occurred on 30th May 2025.
- Clarification: The arrest was for criminal acts of malicious damage/vandalism, theft, and unlawful conversion and carting away of the company properties on 30th May 2025, and not for any purported successful victory obtained at the Chief Magistrates Court, Yaba, Lagos State, as alleged or at all, and the enclosed photographs and Police Extract from Crime Diary, dated 30th May 2025, support this.
Indeed, that the said Adekunle Lawal, Esq got favourable judgement to take possession of “bare land” on behalf of the Claimants does not translate to a right to loot and cart away the Defendant’s properties thereon.
- Continued Police Occupation of Property
- Justification: A report of conspiracy, malicious damage and stealing was consequently lodged with the Police. Arrests were made and as part of Police investigation, the subject property was cordoned off as a crime scene.
- Tampering Incident: On 17th June 2025, 8 trucks loaded with stolen company assets belonging to our company, were mysteriously removed unlawfully by the suspects’ associates.
- Ongoing Police Presence: Necessary to prevent further tampering or asset dissipation while investigations and potential prosecution proceed.
- Rent Payment History
- False Claim: The allegation that the company owed rent from 2019–2023 is untrue.
- Evidence: Rent was paid via bank drafts to the Deputy Chief Registrar of the High Court from 2019 through 2026, after Claimants’ lawyer refused direct payments on behalf of the land owners.
- Fair Hearing and Court Procedure
- Allegation: The company did not defend the eviction suit.
- Rebuttal: The company was not notified of the hearing; its right to fair hearing was violated.
- Legal Action: Judgement and ruling denying motion to set aside are being appealed.
- Right of First Refusal
- Claim: The company refused an offer to buy the property for ₦2.7 billion.
- Rebuttal: No such offer was ever made. Claimants only own the bare land, not improvements. There exists a “right to renew” in the lease, which the Claimants have severally threatened to disregard.
- Appeal of Court Ruling
- Update: The 23rd July 2025 ruling denying the motion to set aside the 20th December 2024, judgement is under appeal, and thus, sub judice.
Conclusion
- The arrest of the lawyers and buyer was lawful and based on credible complaints of vandalism, theft, and criminal conversion.
- The Police, particularly CP Olohundare Moshood Jimoh, acted within the law. The publication accusing him of abuse of power is false and defamatory.
- The suspects admitted wrongdoing during interrogation and later resorted to blackmail and misleading media narratives, when their plea for a soft-landing was denied.
- The allegation sponsored by the lawyers (Adekunle Lawal Esq, Oyewole Rahmon Esq. and their Clients) to the effect that the Commissioner of Police, by his lawful action prompted by the company’s complaint, “is preventing the Judgement Creditor from enjoying the fruits of the judgement”, is self-servingly false and falls flat on its face, as evidenced by the documentary exhibits enclosed in this rejoinder.
